Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1886-07-10
House..

journal tho Speaker announced that the
regular order was the vote on the demand
for the pfsvious question, on the motion
to refer to the committee on invalid pen
slone, theiaessage OF the President vetoius
the bill granting pension to Sally Ann
Bradley. Amid q great deal OF confusion
Mr.. Burrows, OF Michigan, on the part of
Indiana, on the part OF the Democrats, en-
deav ored to come to some arrangement to
prevent time being frittered away with roll
calls. 1t was finally agreed that the de-
mand Tor the previous question should be
withdrawn and that Mr.. Gr0svenor, OF
Ohio, should be allowed fifteen minutes to
oppose the motion, with permission to
some Democrat to reply if SO desired. Mr..
Grosvenor said he desired to heap no re-
elimination or condemnation upon the
President for his veto messages. They
were caused by total misapprehension on
the part OF the President OF his relation to
the administration of the Government. He
(Grosvenor) had read all the vetoes from
that prolific source OF vetoes, and he
thought the trouble was that the President
carefully every act of Congress, and decide
whether, If he was member OF Congress,
he would or would not vote for the bill.
He gave no sort .of consideration or
weight to the fact that the Legislative
branches OF the Government had acted
affirmatively on it. The President
acted upon the idea that theExecutive had
the right and it was his duty to decide alb
solutely on every question. Another idea.
OF the Presidents was that no private acts
should be approved, unless there was law
authorizing it, being wholly G blivious to the
fact that Congress was the law-making
power and had the right to confer pen
sion on anybody. Mr.. Grosvsnor then de-
tailed the facts OF the special bill under
sideration, and commented on the TACT, as
he asserted, that the President had ap.
proved the Fitz John Porter bill on the
very day that he had vetoed the bill grant.
ing the pension OF Sally Ann Bradley, the
mother Of four sons, two of whom had
died on the battlefield and two of whom
were in the hospital disabled. Fitz John
Porter would 20 on the pension BILL while
Sally Ann Bradley would 90 to the poor
house, and this was the Government which
undertook to say that it was dealing gem
erously and literally with it's soldiers. The
House was paralyzed and terrified by The
veto OF a single man. The proposition was
tyranucal and in the direction OF absolute
usurpatinn. Applause from the Repnbli-
can side.
Mr.. Watson merely remarked in reply
that he had just learned that in the Forty
seventh Congress the Republican committee
OF the Senate had reported that the oman
ought to be pensioned for the reasons that
the President said he thought she ought
not be pensioned. [Applause on the Demo-
crat side.]
Mr.. Long, OF Massachusetts,. suggested
that at that time the woman had hus-
band living WHO was in receipt OF pension
The bill and message were then referred
yeas 112, nays Ill.
When the veto message OF the bill grant
ing a pension to Francis Demins waa
reached, the Republicans demanded and
were accorded half an hour for debate.
After the debate the message was referred
without objection. The next and last veto
message upon the Speakers table v as then
laid before the House. It was a mess a.e
vetoing the bill granting pension 70 il. nes
POmiZer, and as this case was rnsar.:e. as
presenting especially strong i:.a:rsrt ths.
Republicans determined to make i.7s:.t
over it's reference. Mr.. Burrows, O! Michi-
gan, vigorously assaulted the veto and
maintained there was no reason why the
bill should be referred to the committee.
There was no facts to be ascertained. and
in such cases it was customary to act upon
the veto without reference. The last note
worthy case WAS the veto OF President
Arthur on the Fitz John Porter bill. That t.
bill had been Immediately considered by
the House without reference to the
committee. The President had vetoed
Romizer bill, because he had not been
mustered in at the time he received his
wound. 1t was true Romizer had not
taken the oath to defend the constitution,
but he had been defending the constitution
against the domestic enemies of the flag.
A man who, in his enthusiasm and patriot
ism, went to the defense OF the constitu-
ton without taking the oath to defend it
was entitled TO some consideration. man
who, without taking the oath to de-
fend the constitution hut did defend it, was
entitled to as much consideration as q
man who took the oath to defend the flag
and then violated that oath, and yet
James Romizer's pension bill was vetoed
and Fitz-Johu Porter was put upon the
rolls. [Applause on the Republican side. |
Mr.. Warner, Of Ohio, believed this to be
meritorious cause and to be in line of
all precedents, but he thought it ought to
be referred to thecommittee.
Mr.. Snowden. OF Penpsylvauia, com.
mended the President for his fear.
less course, and thought that the Other