The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1859-11-15

in regard to public affairs that it is seldom find it
in error in stating occurrences circumstances &c. but
with regard to the action of the last Congress in rela
ton to the Post Office Appropriation Bill We really
| think it is in error, unintentonaly so of course.
The Observer has heretofore quoted from the N. Y.
Journal Of Commerce and Washington Star, which it
calls democratic testimony, to show whom the re-
sponsbility for the defeat of the bill Our friends
again at fault in CHASING the Journal of Commerce
as democratic paper-t is neutral paper {f there
such thing) and if it has sometimes leaned
pretty far towards democracy it because right and
Justice and the countrys interest seemed require it.
But the testimony of the Journal of Commerce is
titled to no more, not as much, credence some we
have cited Mr. ClDgman for instance, who present
and knows exactly what took place.
In letter dated "Senate Chamber, March T. 1882"
Mr. Cngman states the facts in regard to the action of
the House and Senate follows:
"The Post Office appropriation bill came from the
House to the Senate at the present session in the usual
mode 1t made appropriations to the extent of above
twenty millions of dollars of which little less than
four millions to pay off DEFICIENCIES debts due be-
fore the Both of June next and the remainder for the
postal service of the coming year. The bill
fully considered by the Senate for several days. and
usual a number of amendments made. Among
tenn aboshing the Thanking privilege of Sena
tors and Representatives and another raising the
age of letters from three to five cents, &C. sent
back to the House for concurrence in these amend
For time after it reached that body the
majority refused to consider it, though repeated at
tempts made to take it up. AT length, the last
night Of the session. it taken up, but instead of its
amendments being considered as usual and agreed to
rejected, resolution was moved, declaring in sub
stance that the Senate had violated the constitution in
proposing to increase the rates of postage and direct
ing the Clerk of the House to back the bill and
amendments the Senate with copy of their resolu-
ton This motion was made by Mr. Grow, noted
abolitionst from Pennsy lvania and candidate at the
late Congress of the Black Republican party for the
office of Speaker. 1t supported by all the men,
bers of that party, by several individuals belonging to
the late Know Nothing or American organization and
by several democrats, and therefore passed. AS
this violation of all parliamentary usages of all
Legislative proprietes, and course insulting to
ordinate branch of the Congress- its supporters doubt
less thought that the Senate could not consistently with
its sefrespect take any notice of the matter and
thus the bill be suffered die quietly the derment
of the public service. When the message brought
in by their Clerk however the Senate feeling that the
public interest to be of paramount
determined overlook the insult, however gross it
might be, and sent back respectful message to the
House requesting a committee of conference consider
the disagreement the BILL This acceded to,
and joint committee raised. When it assmbed
however, the members from the House refused
slider this bill in any way. Had they done SO, the
Senate, | feel confident, would have receded from all
its amendments rather than let the bill fail. In accord
ance however, with the views OF the House. they would
have nothing do with this BILL but insisted that the
Senate branch of the committee should accept instead
of it, entire bill, which represented to be
similar to the which had originally from the
House. The Senate branch of the committee seeing
that nothing else could be DONE agreed report this
bill to the Senate for its consideration.
Their report was accordingly made to the Senate on
the last day of the session. just forty minutes before IL
clock. the period at which by the constitution the
session necessarily terminate. The bill
nounced and read by its title only for the first time.
call then made for the reading of it through but
it said that there would not be time to read
before the period of adjournment. 1t bill to
the Senate had never been printed but suppose that
thn SarFn cnnlh nhahlT huVa
before II o'clock, though there was certainly time
to consider its provisions.
1t said that either pass it without read
ing it once, not at ALL A debate sprung up
which exhausted the remaining minutes and the bill
was thus left Enacted on.
Ought the Senate have passed this bill without its
being read to let Senators know what of
it was2 Remember that by the rules of the
houses all bills be read three times in each
house, and this is done unless waived by general con-
of all the members. Ought legislative body
pass bill without at least reading it
tain what sort of a measure it isl"
The above and the reference by the Obser-
to the Congressional Globe, only differ in point
which is material to side of the dscussion-the !
Observer says the bill taken up by the House on
the morning of the last day of the session; Mr. Cngman
says it taken up at night of that day But suppose
the Observer is correct about the time at which the bill
was taken up for consideration, might not the House |
have kept until before returning it the Senate
What we have been cOntendlng for is to show that |
the House is responsible for the defeat of the BILL
that portion of it which desired embarrass the
Administrhton-that Grow abolitionist headed the
which caused the bill fail and that Vance
md Gilmer co-operated with Grow by sustaining his
acous resolution 1t is true the Observer states
land have heretofore stately that democrats
also voted for Grows resolution, but because they did
wrong it does not relieve Vance and Gmer from blame
throw the responsibility for the defeat of the bill
he Senate. IfGrow, and Vance and Gilmer, &C., had
not been aiming embarrass Mr. Buchanan's admins
ration why did they not merely reject the Senate's
amendments and let the bill go back for concurrence
and not send back without action accompanied with
declaration that the Senate had violated the Consttu
ion. =
Our friends of the Observer in their first and second
epy to our articles contended that the House did
IN the Senates amendments by rejecting them but
believe it is conceded such action was had. We
consider this important point, for if the House had
elected the amendments and sent the bill back there
no doubt but that the Senate would have receded,
md all the difficulty been avoided That Gmer and
Vance acted as at first charged is not denied. So
he difference between the Observer and ourselves is
the time which the original bill finally act
d on by the House and which the bill
ported the Senate. Mr. Clingman says the action
Turing the sast night of the session, and the bill
reported only forty minutes before the hour fixed
" law for the final adjournment which did allow
he Senate sufficient time to pass the bill.
Missionary Meetings in Concord Presbytery.-
n