The Portland daily press., 1880-04-28
Mr.. Reeds Speech.
COURTS AND MARSHALS.


The immediate deficiency bill came down
| from the Senate in its amended form a week
| ago Saturday. On Thursday the Republicans
contrived to get an hour in which to discuss it,
Mr.. Reed of Maine was their spokesman. His
| speech was as follows:
Nobody regrets more than do the emphasis
| which has been placed on this situation by the
| persistent refusal of the other side to allow us
| a short time for discussion. do not rise here
| for the purpose of giving utterance to set
| speech. L only desire to put on record certain
| observations which are pertinent to this bill;
| and although l wish now to call attention to
| the scant courtesy which has been allowed to
| us upon this subject / propose to do it in a
| manner which shows that l have breadth and
| catholicity of spirit enough to appreciate the
| situation on the Democratic side. And 1 ask
| you gentlemen on our side to put yourselves
| for moment in the place of the gentlemen on
| the other side and see what you would have
| done under like circumstances.
| Suppose that you had begun this Congress
| with an avowed declaration and determination
| that you would override and overthrow the
| legitimate constitutional power of the Execu-
| tive; and suppose that after one hundred and
| six days you had gone, beaten out of these
| halls, had gone, thus baffied and defeated, to
| the people and had by them been rebuked
! from all quarters OF the compass, do you sup
| pose that you would dare to come here and dis
| cuss any question again? Suppose you your
| selves had found your opponents upon the 9TH
| er side divided and distracted by internal dis
SenSlonS, and suppose that by your actions and
| your words you had left them united all over
| the land and victorious from one end to the
| other, do you suppose you would repeat the
| operation at the regular session of Congress?
OF course you would not. Suppose seven-and-
| seventy of you had stood up in your places and
| with solemn countenances, never so much as
| smiling at each other, declared that while the
| Constitution said that we could make and alter
election laws, nevertheless we could not do
| either; and suppose that at the very next
| term the ultimate tribunal, the Supreme Court
| OF the United States, bad shown that all you
had said was nonsense, and seven-and-seventy
| OF you had only shown your ears when you
thought you were showing your minds, what
| sort of courage would you be able to bring to
| the discussion of constitutional principles?
! And say that our brethren on the Democratic
side are amply justified in the struggle they
| have made to prevent utterance of their own
sentiments especially, and Of our sentiments
| too.
! So successful have they been in gagging
| their own side at this session of Congress that
| they have actually undertaken the business of
gagging ours too. [Applause.] Suppose for
another thing, you belonged to party which
was made out of odds and ends, party that
had no principle which ran through it, party
| that could not command score of votes upon
| any particular principle would you expose
| them to discussion and to the utterance of
1
| party that had met at st. Louis and declared
| themselves in favor of a reformed tariff, and
suppose that, day after day, every Pennsylva-
| mia Democrat, every Connecticut Democrat,
and almost every New York Democrat, had
| gone up and proclaimed himself in favor of the
| protection of the best kind or the worst inst
| as you please to call it. Of course you and
would be desirous under such circumstances of
| suppressing discussion.
| And when you come to questions of individ-
! uals, suppose you had men on your side who
| had contributed to that magnificent improve
| ment of the African race which has been des-
| ignated by radical malignity as the massacre
| and butchery of Fort Pillow; and suppose you
| knew at any moment they were liable to get
| up and pronounce a discourse on the doctrine
| and duty of conciliation! How would you like
| to let loose such men as those? Suppose you
had another man in your ranks who wanted to
call in all the silver in America and all in Eu-
rope to be coined into silver dollars, would you
| care to go into discussion of the financial
| question under such circumstances? Certainly
| not. And suppose that very recently you had
| tried even the silence law and were not quite
| able to carry that out but had felt the neces-
| sity of taking the benefit of the last hour and
! putting forward the ablest and at the same
time the most experienced man that had been
| in the last election to make a discourse on the
subject. And suppose that that gentleman,
| after he had got over the fervor of the Demo-
| cratic applause with which his effort was
| greeted and had examined his own speech
carefully, had not been able to get it into
shape so as to place it before the public in the
Record for more than eight days and has not
got it there yet. And suppose another gentle
man had got up and proclaimed Republican
| wickednesS and infamy in regard to the public
| printing and the paper contracts, and suppose
when he found that those paper contracts had
been under the sole charge, had been approved
and ratified by the Democratic committee on
printing he had been unable to prepare his
speech so as to print it up to this time.
| Laughter.
Now if you had met with all these msfor-
4 tunes, would you not think that mouth of
that size ought to be closed right straight
along? Laughter
Now hope 1 have shown you that 1 am
capable, inasmuch as they have given them
selves only twenty minutes and have given us
an hour, of doing them justice before I start
out in my speech. L wanted to make this a
prelude to the entirely non-partisan speech
that purpose to make here this afternoon.
have alluded to the argument of the gen.
tleman from Ohio Mr.. Ewingl and purpose
to say few words in reply to it; not in the ma
ture of reply exactly, but simply because it
clears my way for the argument, or rather for
the suggestions-for perhaps they do not rise
TO the dignity of an argument-which l wish
to offer to this House on this bill.
The gentleman from Ohio, forgetting all
about the beautiful and interesting discussion
that we had during the one hundred and six
days we were here in the extra session, ac-
tually brings forward as statement of our OBJ
iectionS to such bills as this, the assertion that
these provisions are objected to merely because
they are legislation appropriation bills.
Now / want to set him right. No party has
ever made stand against legislation on ap-
proprition bills as such solely. individuals
have made that objection, but no party.
We take our stand upon proposition more
substantial than that, a proposition which is
not gainsaid by our history and is continually
gainsaid by their history. 1t is the PROPOSE
l Il ,fofsx
ate has any right to put on appropriation bills
legislation which is objectionable to another
branch of the Government for the purpose OF
coercing that branch of the Government to
approve a bill which would not otherwise have
| its approval, By withholding appropriations fol
the support of the Government unless such
agreement was had. There is the proposition
for which we contend, and there Is the basis
upon which we can stand. Yet the gentleman
from Ohio with all his experience has not ap-
parently found that out yet.
Now let me refer to the two examples which
he gives. In the first place. he says that we
attempted to coerce Andrew johnson. Now
his sympathy with Andrew. lnson is natural
for both of them used to be VI III us. Why did
we do that? 1t was because we had the power
in the case he vetoed that bill to pass it by q
two-thirds vote. We therefore did not expect
to coerce him, but expected to pass legislation
which we believed to be right in proper, con-
stitutional way. And he did not dare, not
withstanding all the vetoes that he had made
to provoke the fury of decent people by OBJ
iecting to such bill.
Then the gentleman brings against us a fact
which during all the one hundred and six days
of the extra session was carefully kept con.
cealed. No gentleman on the other side evel
alluded to that other instance to which he re-
fers; that is. that in 1856 we attempted by thi;
means to coerce the Senate We did. But il
took us Just ten days, three hours and twenty
minutes to back out of that foolishness; and il
took them one hundred and six days and five
hours to do o like thing. And that is just the
measure of difference between the sense of the
two parties.
That is the only instance where we are really
obnoxious to the charge which we make
against them And | think the wisdom O
our past life and history ought to be allowed tt
90 in mitigation even of that, especially wheI
we consider the extreme provocation whicl
we received at the time. And have NJ
doubt that the gentleman from Ohio himsel
sympathized with us then.
desire now to address to this House few
observations upon the particular amendmen
| which is presented here for our consideration
T do not purpose to discuss any part of th
Immediate deficiency bill, except the singh
clause in relation to the election laws. Tha
clause will be found on pages II and u of tn
bill as it is now printed with the Senat
| Il nrAyrilnS