Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1860-01-04

House, was rejected by that gentleman and his
! friends buftwo members of the Republican party
voting in favor of it. and the gentleman from Penn
| and the present candidate of the other side for
Speaker voting against it, The bill then stood re-
! jjccted. The Democratic side of the House. anxious
to make provision for the support of the Govern
ment and Tor the relief of the mail contractors of
the country moved reconsideration of the bill: It
was brought before the House by reconsideration
and the House again voted on it. And sir upon
that second vOte-the bill being still without any
amendment from the Senate for it had never been
to the Senatc-the gentleman from Pennsylvania
the Republican candidate for Speaker at this time
and the whole body of the Republican party, with
but seven exceptions again voted against the pass
age of the bill They voted against it the second
time after it had been announced that having been
once reconsidered another motion to reconsider would
not he in order and that. if rejected then 1t would
have to stand rejected altogether All this Mr.
Clerk occurred before the bill had been to the Sen
ate. If the object of tae gentleman from PennSyl-
vania to prevent the Senate from encrOachinr
upon the prerOgativeS of the ouSe-if that was his
sole object in having his resolution passed-what
reason can he give to the mail contractors of the
country for having voted against the bill twice be-
fore the Senate amendment had been put upon 1t?
Nov, think ] am uStifiable in the face of these
facts, in saying that the design which the gentleman
had in view to kill the bill and that the motive
and the object that he had to compel the PreS-
dent to call Congress together shortly after the 4th
of March. Why, who of those of us who were
here in the last Congress and were in this Hall on
the last night of the session. has forgotten with
what frantic vehemence when conference commit
tee was applied for by the Senate and was about to
be appointed, the gentleman from PENNSYLVANIA got
up and resisted it until he had assurance that
the bill itself could not go to the committee? So
much was he afraid that the committee of conference
would agree upon some bill that could pass and be-
or,1t ,att acln cIolo &c
and his friends to have extra session would thus
he defeated, that he stood here Just before daybreak
on the 4th Of March last and resisted to the very
uttcrmost allowing the committee of conference to
have possession of the hill.
Now, | say-and think | am juStifiable in say
ing-that the most surprising thing have witness
ed on this floor is the attempt of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania to hOll this side of the House respon
Sible for the defeat of that BILL when the records of
the country show that he himself is responsible for
its defeat and that he and his party are alone re-
SpOnSiblc to the country and to the mail con-
tractors for the failure of the Government to meet
its obligations.
Nor is this, sir all the proof We all remember
that when they had succeeded in defeating the b
and they knew full well that their course would de-
feat it, and the President undertook to carry the
Department without calling. Congress together-has
any gentleman in this House forgotten how they de-
nounccd the Postmaster General the President, and
that method having been resorted to as means
of relieving the mail contractors from the cOnse-
quenceS Of the act of the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vana and his friends ? They denounced the Prcs-
dent and everybody connected with the adminiStra
ton as being guilty of usurpatOn of power and a
violation of law, because in their anxiety to relieve
the mail contractors from the danger and embarrass-
ment which the gentleman from Pennsylvania had
brought upon them, they were eneavOring to issue
certificates under which the mail contractors might
raise money.
] conclude, Mr.. Clerk with repetition of my
question to the gentleman from Pennsylvania; and
! hope he will answer it before the House, and to
the satisfaction of the country: if his motive in de-
fcaing that bill was to prevent the Senate from
uSurping part Of the prerogatves Of this House.
why it that he voted against the bill twice be-
fore the amendment of the Senate had ever been
put upon it:
return my thanks to the gentleman from Vir-
ginia for his courtesy in aifordng me oppOrtun
ty Of submitting these remarks.