Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1882-04-06
THE VOTE BY WHICH IT FAILED.

W ASHiN"ION, April 0.-lHe PRESIDENTIAL
count bill coming up as unfinished busi-
ness, Mr.. Farley moved to lay il aside and
proceed with the consideration OF the
vetoed anti-C Chinese BILL which was adopted
by vote OF - to -. Cameron, of Wis
consin, Miller, OF Colorado, and Jones, of
Nevada, voted with the Democrats, to take
up, and Mr.. Sherman moved to refer the
bill to the Foreign Relations Committee,
which motion the Chair held to be in order.
Sherman supported and elaborated the
objections OF the President, and urged that
as there was no occasion for haste, the
measure should he carefully perfected in
Committee with view of obviating these
objections. Mr.. Garland expressed the
opinion that in view OF the protracted dis.
cussionS of the measure in the Senate and
House, it was improbable that any new
light could be thrown upon il; that as in
telligent action could be had at this time
as well as any other. and that the only pur-
pose Of the proposed reference was to
Bury the Bill.
Mr. Morgan argued the motion, by in
yolyinS virtual reconsideration of the
measure. was an evasion of the COnStltu-
tional requirement of direct vote. Re-
ierring TO the memorandum of five objec-
tons to the bill by the Chinese minister,
which accompanied the veto. he said he be-
lieved this TO be the first instance III Amer
ican history i'll which a President of the
United States had consulted foreign
power about what Congress was lcgislating.
as to whether the proposed legislation
,t.p 4 ~ Ia tn hat IN fa
as concerned the Presidents objections, the
Chinese minister had been worth more
than all the arguments on which the bill
passed \ Ongress. charging the Repuhll.
can administration had arraycd themselves
Hostility TO any Legislation
on the question. He arraigncd the Rcpuh.
liCan party for having assumed like atti-
tude. and said the Republican leader in the
Senate was now attempting 10 smother the
question and slip around it by referring it
10 the committee.
Mr. Bayard said it was useless for the
frienG> cf the bill TO expect by referring
the bill 70 change it, features IN accordance
with the Presidents objections, and they
were compelled H. see il Knocked IN the
head bv what he Callei the Chimes vote.
H. proceeded To answer the sole objection.
he sa'i. upon which the President had
seen II to return the bill, and show :, had
10 justification in fact. no jUstiiicaCi"a in
COmity, and no justification upon any re
tenCc, to 4 dignilicd and respcCl.Gl cOnSid-
Grafton OF one branch Of the government
lOr another.
As to the Presidents announcement
that - nation is justified in rcpudiating
its treaty obligations. only when they are
in conflict with great and paramount in
tereSt" Mr.. Bayard said he had always un-
dersiood repUliation TO be- the disclaimer
oi an obligation. and therefore he regard
ed il
CnsOund in Equity
t. announce that there could be any repu-
dating of the treaty obligations. Further
more. nothing could he found in the action
OF Congress to Justify the further objection
upon which the veto was based, character
iZing the statements OF the veto on this
point as having been given in very strong,
and. what seemed TO some persons. and To
himself. very coarse language. He said
the phraScOlogy did not seem To he that
which ought properly to characterize COM
between the great depar tmcntS
of this government. This language, COM
ing from the Executive in regard to an act
of Congress deliberately discussed and
passed by both Houses, and unanimously
recommended by q Committee of the Sen
ate was an impugnment OF an act OF Con-
gresS and of the votes of those who passed
it. That comfy. which, though unwritten.
was as essential for the good government
oi this country, as the written law, had
been lost sight OF.
In respect to the Presidents understand.
ing OF the agreement between the Comml>-
>iOncrS who negotiated the treaty as to the
period OF the suspension of the coming Of
Chinese laborers he asserted that the whole
nf M
veto.
Was sUnwRrrantcd.
Aside from this fact, We cannot look at
what proceeded this diplomacy, except
upon the ground that there is obsCurity or
in the text OF the treaty which
cannot otherwise he clucidated. rule re-
peatedly reiterated by the courts and re-
Gently laid down by the Supreme Court Of
the United States, the facts did not justify
the Presidents assumption, to know the
Of the treaty. We must look at the
treaty itself. To go back TO find what
was lurking in the mind oi the COmmis.
sioner prior to his final agreement. is To
embark upon sea of such uncertainty that
the Interpretation may be found for any
which i sought 10 he given
AN instrument. There was no safety for
either contracting party il the treaty itself,
SOIemnIy Signed and Sealed.
was not 10 he held 10 contain evidence of
its own meaning and construction. Am
bigUitv in an instrument i to he cleared up
from the rcontempOraneOuS history, but the
must he established before We
can compel the language of the treaty to
bend tn something that has preceded it.
Promising he would adopt the same facts
and same source Of facts which the eNeCu.
tive had resolved to, Nj. Bayard real at
length from the memoranda Of the couver-
sations between the commissioners pend
ing the negotiations. to show the Chinese
and its commissions
ers voluntarily conceded that
the power to regulate. limit or suspend the
coming Of Chinese labOrers into this cOun-
Try was. 10y this treaty. vested solely in
the discretion Of the government OF the
United States.
Mr.. Sherman suggested the use of the
term skilled. as applied to laborers. in
scribcd bv the treaty, which wa one OF
tbeS objections to the bill made By the
Chinese Minister, and which the Presi-
dent had reiterated He added il had not
been shown in the correspondence read by
Mr.. Bavard. that the Chinese Commits.
,ioners ever consented 10 that inte-preta-
tiOn of the claim.
Mr.. Bayard replied that he would leave
that 10 be accounted for by the commits
sioners upon their own representatives.,
and that his effort had been mainly to
show the single objection to the twenty
years suspension as a di>hOnorable iimita-
tion
Was Untenable.
The pending question being divided at
the request Of Mr.. Garland. the vote upon
the first branch. to refer the bill to the
Committee on Foreign Relations resulted.
aves Is: noes 81. A party vote. The sec
ond branch, TO refer the messrge and pa
pers. was also negatived. Ayes ~ nays -
ON the question. Shall the bill pass
Notwithstanding the objections OF the
President" the vote was-ayes -, nays p;
20 tie bill failed. two-thirds not having
voted in the affirmative.