The New York herald., 1868-03-15

tne internal revenue were concerned, placing them
On the same footing as onicers Of the customs In
& ss on 81
It was taken frou the Speakers table. ! ex-
gIsinsd !. and there T. the record %ou.s in
which shows what took place IN that connection. |
Does the gentleman pretend to say that In any par.
that bil that tie slightest degree misrepresented
Mr. BoYER-No, sir; did not say that the gentle |
man misrepresented the hill as it then stood.
Mr.. 6cHENCK-very well. Then the offence did not |
begin there. stated fully that bill It's nature and
character. And In my statement after some delay |
in the endeavor to bring the attention OF the House
suficiently 70 wake up the seepiest, II was taken
subject OF action Thus far then the gentleman and
are agreed. What nexti Unanimous consent hav-
ing its consideration thus brought before the House.
the Chairman OF the Judiciary Committee asks me II
will yield for the purpose OF enabling him to intro
duce an amendment-nOt very unusual
under consideration What is the character
takes away the jurisdiction OF the Supreme Court In
the McCarde case and in like cases. he says they
Mr.. BoYER-I did not say that it did take away the
Jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court
Mr.. SCHENCK-What thenP
Mr.. BoYER-But that 1t was intended to take away
that Jurisdiction.
Mr.. scHENcK-very wen. The gentleman con-
heard that amendment understood perfectly well
what its result would be, and do not know whether
gentleman ana myself as to It's effect. liked
me believed ana it rs RsIeeS ss.,ss
the opinion OF the gentleman from Pennsylvania
the subject of its pertnency to the other objects
Of the BILL say can have very little respect for the
| parliamentary knowledge OF any man who will say
that extension of bill to other matters afecting
the jurisdiction Of the courts Of the United States
| the subject OF appeals Is not germane TO one which
| already provides, in Its very language for
and concerning such jurisdiction. Believing i to be
1 no nd hqin md dtettn IN
| derstood, what did says What the gentleman
would perhaps not have said-that was willing the
amendment should be received but did not attempt
| to accept it. had no power to do so. AZ media
ton OF the bill simply consented to refrain from
the amendment that it might be voted on in the
House. and then demanded the previous question
on the bin and amendment: But still the gentleman
| liant watchdogs on the walls Of liberty, and always
guarding the constituton-did not observe It; and
them Now would not make confession OF that
kind II were the gentleman; should be afraid to be
held to accountability by my constituents. G.aughter)
| l remember that the gentlemen on the other side
profess to be the peculiar guardians OF the consttu-
| ton; when remember that they claim that when
the Supreme Court, the courts OF the United
States alluded to In any legislation here, 1t is
their business 10 take that nothing Is done which
shall in any way curtail offset the power OF these
courts, ] must not conclude that the gentlemen, or
amendment; for they y", Were ali sleeping and did
| not see In 1t what the gentleman thinks
he now discovers. II So and II they regard 1t and
consrue 1t differently now, it s not for to raise
any question either about their obtuseness or
about their late waking up to discovery which they
were then not capable Ofmaking But sir, do not
| mean to screen myself behind any pretence on my
part that did not comprehend the moment It was
because was glad that an amendment Of that kind
Was offered, and hoped would become a law.
| Mr.. BoYER-I desire to ask the gentleman whether,
when heard the amendment read from the Clerks
desk II the first time that he had heard 1t read,
or whether he had read 1t himself before, or knew
before 1t was read that IL was about to be oferedS
| Mr.. ScHENCK-Well sir, dsclaiming any admis-
sion on my part that / am bound to be chatechised
cross question mel will be frank on my own &C
count, and not because i recognize any such
right. ] never had heard the amendment read,
| never had seen It.; but l did hear mo-
| ment before that good thing to accomplish a
good object-just such as was accomplished might
was glad to have an opportunity OF hearing such an
amendment read and was not so stupid but that
and could give it, as did, my hearty concurrence
Mr.. BoYER-I thank the gentleman, and think
the country will thank him for that confession.
Mr.. SCHENCK-I am not afraid OF the country not
thanking me. The gentleman has alluded to thu
Supreme Court and It's Jurisdiction which he think,
1t was the Intention by this amendment, TO affect
reference to the McCardle case lie thinks 1t was
conspiracy to undermine and destroy that court
Sir, have lost confidence In the majority OF tn
, Supreme Court OF the United States. Ii not tina
plain enough I believe that they usurp powe
tions purely political in reference to the status
States and the manner in which those States L
|
and If find them abusing that power by attempting
| to arrogafe to themselves Jurisdiction under any
statute which happens to be on the statute book and
from which they claim derive that jurisdiction and
II can take that power away from them by the re
peal Of the statute, VIII do it, Is there any indis
| tnctness in,fhat ?
Mr.. BoYER-That is u very manly and courageous
| declaration.
Mr.. scHENcK-Now, sir, / hold that the Supreme
Court OF the United States arrogating to itself pre-
tension TO settle not merely judicial, but political
questions, and trampllng on the principles OF the
|
every other decision OF that kind, Is, majority OF
It, step by step proceeding In usurpaon OF Jurisdic
ton which does not belong TO IL; and hold 1t to be moi
only my right, but my duty, representative Of the
people TO clip the wings Of that court whenever
| can in IFS attempts to take such flights.
Mr.. HOLMAN, tdem) OF ind.-The bill came before
the House by unanimous consent and, Us think
| the amendment was germane to 1t. or course the
point OF order could not be made; but submit to
the gentleman from Ohio whether II exactly fair
for him. having obtained the unanimous consent fol
| the bill, TO allow amendment to be offered to II
| which may have been germane but which could not
have come before the House by unanimous consent
| Mr.. ScHEfCK-When q bill Is brought before the
House a statement OF Its cOntents-H that state.
ment be true-as II Is not intended to deny in this
case-there nothing like fraud or trick in bringing
it up; but when II is before the House every member
knows 1t IL subject to amendment. Now
have as many shorieomings probably; as Q
House In not watching carefully the business that Ia
being transacted; but never heard 1t pretended that
because man approved OF bill brought before the
House he was to curl himself up from that point in
his chair and 90 to Sleep not regarding that the
character 0f the Dill might by amendment he IN any
degree altered. These gentlemen complain not Of
| the bill, but OF the amendment which was made Ia
It; but the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Ho
mani says that ! allowed the amendment To
be made TO the bill. The gentleman talks
outside OF the record. said that was willing the
| amendment should be offered and voted upon by the
House, and made the necessary motion to bring the
House 10 a vote upon II, and unless am responsible
| a. the guardian Of the gentleman from Indiana and
| the gentleman from Pennsylvania and others, 1 do
net see bat tnat my responsibility ends there Let
| them 20 to their constituents and apologize
nnf finn nfr
| gentleman from Indiana admits, was offered,
which was to effect some important interest, and n
the gentlemen the other side slept on their posts
and did not observe what going on, IL begins and
ends here, and there IL of IL. II the gentle.
| man viii dare to say, as know he viii not, that
brought the bill. before the House by statement OF
IL which does not correspond with the facts, then he
| would make very different case; but that he does
| not pretend.
Messrs. BOYER and HOLMAN addressed the Chair
| The SPEAKER asked the gentleman from Ohio TO