Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1859-03-11
DEFEAT OF the Post amce Appropria-
EfII-ConstftutfonaI Question
between the senate and House of
n REPRESENTATIVES,. .I1f


ten cents. A majority of the House were a
resolutely bent on preventing il. To III
postoffice appropriation bill from the House
the Senate attached the obnoxious rider
Whereupon, the House adopted the followin,
resolution by a vote of III to 76-being
majority of 81:
} Rsso'red, That House BILL No. 872. making
appropriations for defraying the expense o
she PostGfic" Department for the year endin,
Goth June, 1860, with The Senate amendment
thereto, be returned to the Senate, as section
thin teenth of said amendments is in the natur,
Of a revenue bill.
= Among the yeas are 20 Democrats-IC
from Pennsylvania 3 from New York, from
Kentucky, and from Minnesota.
or the Tennessee delegation, Mr.. MAYYARr
and Gen. ZOILICoFFER voted in the af1irma
tive, and the Democratic members, with Mr.
READY. in the negative. III t
The thirteenth section of the Senate'i
amendments. which the House considered and
declar d TO be Tin the nature of revenue
bill" is the section providing for an increase
postage. a --T
2 p The first clause of the seventh section Of
the first article Of the Constitution is as fol
lows:
".All bills for raising revenue shall originate
in the House Of representatives.; but the
Senate may propose or concur with amend
nents as on other bills"
Did the amendment of the Senate. increas-
ing the rates of postage. fall within the mean
Ing of this provision Of the Constitution ?
il was under the belief that it did, that the
House returned the bill and amendments to
the Senate.
We shall not undertake to decide the point
in dispute between the two Houses, hut CON
tent ourselves, for the present, with briefly
referring to two discussions in the Senate,
dnring the first session of the last Congress,
In which was discussed the question of what
is and what is not a bill or proposition for
cruising revenue" according to the true in
tent and meaning of the constitutional pro-
vision above quoted.
Ga the oath of January, 1858, what was
called the Fifteen Million Loan Bill - being
under consideration by the Senate. Mr.. SIM
Mons OF Rhode Island, offered an amendment
which provided for assessing the duties on
Imports on the A0me value, instead Of the
foreign value.
Mr.. HUNTER. OF Virginia, OBJECTED to this
amendment "as being in the nature Of the
originaton Of a bill TO raise revenue. 1t was
undoubtedly designed to increase the reve-
nues from customs. 1t was proposition to
assess the duty, not on the foreign value, NJ
the present laws provide, but on the home
uaiua ypbich l. to lao
by all the costs and charges of bringing the
goods here. and by the duty, too, as he I'M
derstood. for il is the market value in New
York" He maintained that, by the Consti- |
tution. the Senate had no authority to origi- |
nate any such measure.
Mr.. SIMMONS replied, that he did not pro-
pose. by his amendment, to raise a single rate
of duty in the whole tariff. Not only did he
not undertake 10 increase the rates of duty,
bui he did not propose to change the prnc-
piles of the existing laws on the subject of the
collection of duties.
Mr.. HUNTER r,jOined, that il was enough |
for bin that Mr.. SIMNoNs's amendment pro-
posed in effect Ito raise the tan f very large
ly," and that it was a measure 'to originate
revenue"
Mr.. HUNTER here evidently used the term
Z" raise in the sense of the word increase. He
u1dorstood and maintained. that it was not
within the constitutional competency OF the
Senate to originate any measure, the effect of
which would be to raise revenue-that is, 10 |
ihcredse the Existing revenue.
Mr.. TONES, while he was in favor of the
principle OF the amendment, was compelled
10 view it as measue by which the taxation
OF the country in the future would be assessed
and collected; and therefore, il was n scheme
for raising revenue within the meaning of |
the constitutional prohibition upon the SEN
ate. He had not been able to bring his mind |
10 the conclusion that bill for raising revenue |
IN ant, in The intendment Of the Constitution. |
bill for increasing the revenue. They were |
d.fferent words and meant different things. His
opinion was, that the proposed measure would
increase the revenue for some things, and d.
minish it in others. But he did not put his
objection on that ground If it had nothing
TO DO with taxing the amount TO be paid, and
nothing TO do with the collection Of the reve-
nue. his objection would not lie, and he would
vote for IL. II bill were introduced in the
Senate to levy one-half the existing duties on
imports, il would. in his opinion, be obnox-
ious to the constitutional objection. Itwould
still be a bill for raising revenue"
Mr.. SEWARD was at loss to understand
how the amendment confcted with the con-
sii,utioual power of the Senate. A House
bill levying a tax of one per cent. on any ar
ticle might be raised by amendments in the
Senate SO us to levy a tax Of one hundr, per
cent on that article, or bill from the House
proposing to levy one million OF dollars might
b. made in the Senate bill TO raise one hun
dred millions, and sent back to the House in
that form.
Mr.. CRIrrESDES did not think the PROPOSE
al prohibition upon the Senate Where was
the policy, where was the proprieiy of the SEN
ate of the United States making this sort of
Why should they be guilty of
that species Of industry merely for the pur-
pore of circumseribiDg their own powers:
II was The privilege of the House OF Rep
resentatives, he said. If the Senate infracted
lis duties and undertook to originate bills of
eyenue or bills that could be fairly consider
cd 10 conflict with the Houses exclusive pow
er 10 originate bills OF revenue--it WAS the
privilege Of the House. in such case, TO make
the objeetion--to take the exception.
No decision was made by the Senate In re-
gard TO the alleged uneonstisntionality OF I
the measure proposed by the Senator from
Rhode Island, a. being measure for raising
question having having been Ia