Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1859-01-14


, and would so be received by the State
Here, too, as well as in giving the bond
Montpelier yielded to the advice and sug
gestons of others, and paid $4,000 before
the maturity of the bond, and before she
had expected to pay; and that, too, an q
time of almost unparalleled str'ngency IN
monetary affairs. Night she not reasoaa'
bly, expect approval and confidence for this
conduct, rather than abuse.
But, at the last session, Montpelier was
surprised by ne,o contest for the State
House for it is either a disingenuous, or
an ill-informed mind that does not admit
that the contest has been for the Capitol,
rather than for the appropriation. The
forces of Burlington were organized as COM
pactly as at the extra session. They were
compressed into unity by a process recent
ly introduced into the legislative tactics OF
Vermont, which threatens TO annihilate the
last remnant of personal independence so
that it was common excuse by members
that they must go with their counties, al
though their judgments were the other
way.
A bill was introduced and passed the
| ilOuSts " HaNO tllC HCAt SNcotOhS1 uh'h t'o
completion of the House, at Burlington and
Rutland, A majority of the Committee on
Finance was from localities opposed to
Montpelier. That Committee surprised
every one, except those in the secret of this
combination, by reporting bill which ould
cause the work upon the State House to be
suspended unless Montpelier should pay
/ $4,000 FORTHWITH. This bill passed
the House, and the Senate proposed an
amendment which made an unconditional
appropriation, and left the bond in full
force. TIE House disagreed, and a Com
mittee of Conference was appointed on the
last night Of the session, consisting of SEN
ators Butler of Windham Comfy, Gleed
of Lamoille County, and Davis Of Caledo-
MIA County; and Messrs. Linsley of Rut-
land, Kellogg of Brattleboro, and Needham
| of Hartford Senator Gleed having been
| favorable to the location at Burlington.
This Committee met, and four of the Com
mttee agreed upon and proposed an amend
ment which required Montpelier TO pay
$4,000, in addition to the $4,000 already
paid in, making $4,000, and left the bond
IN full force i; an amendment which was re-
garded as quite severe upon Montpelier.
Messrs. Linsley and kellogg dissented be-
cause. as we assert, and as was very evident
and not disguised, that they were opposed
to any compromise, and acre appointed for
the purpose of defeating an appropriation
at all hazards; so that it could be called
committee of conference only by courtesy.
Upon this report being made to the Sen
ate, they receded from their former amend
ment, adopted the amendment recommend
ed by the committee of conference, and
sent it to the House. But it had been the
concerted plan to stop the work upon the
State House in some way, and therefore the
question must be Graded on some pretext.
And it was in fact wholly evaded by very
adroit system of special pleading, maneu-
vering aud feigned issues.
The Speaker refused to receipe the mes
sage from the Senate for the reason, as he
ruled, that the committee of conference had
made no report, because it was necessary
that majority Of the committee of each
House shall concur in the report.
In this complication of questions of or
der the Senate proposed the same amend
ment to the general appropriation bill which
had been sent from the House; the object
of the Senate being simply to have this
amendment properly and tairly submitted
10 the consideration of the House But
when this amendment came into the House,
it was met by false issue and by infam-
matory defamation. 1t was said by the
leaders of the opposition to Montpelier that
the Senate had no right to make the amend
ment, because such an appropriation must
originate in the House. And so they de-
claimed, with well feigned and tumid indig-
nation, and loudly called upon the House to
repel this "outrage upon their rights this
''iint1ngement of their orerogatire," and ut
tered quite terrific threats against the SEN
ate, and thus lashed their followers into
quite fury of resentment; and the amend
ment was rejected ,oithom any debate upon
the merits, in order to ''reb,tke the Senate, !"
as it was urged.
And yet these leaders must have known
that the Constitution has the express pro-
vision:
provided, that all revenue bills shall
originate in the House of Representatives,
but the Senate may propose or concur with
amendments, as on other bills"
When the House thus rejected the amend
ment it was nearly six o'clock in the morn
ing, the hour fixed for the final adjournment,
and of course no further action could be
had the first instance, we believe, in the
history of the State, that our Legislature
has been kept in session all night. Bur-
lington had accomplished her present pur-
pose. Her ulterior purpose TO remove the
capitol was patent to every intelligent OBJ
server. And if any one had denied this TO
be the Interior purpose, he would have been
met by laugh of scorn as being either a
dupe, or as intending to dupe others.
The course of the Senate was eminently
courteous, dignifed and parliamentary
The course of the opposition to Montpelier,
in the House, was in marked and unfavor-
able contrast to that of the Senate, and to
that adopted by Burlington and her friends
at the session of 1857.
: When the Legislature adjourned, and
, Montpelier found that no means were pro-
, vided for the completion of the State