Library Collections: Document: Full Text
 |
The Senate Reacts To Franklin Pierce's Veto
| |||||||||||||
Previous Page Next Page All Pages
|
Page 3: | |
| 19 | Gentlemen may draw different inferences from the language of the message; they may suppose that the President would veto one bill, and not another. All that may be so; but a full discussion of the doctrines of the Constitution, of the provisions of the Constitution, must necessarily come up in the discussion of this message. They must come up in such a shape now. Fortunately, they must go before the people of the United States. They must be made an issue before the people of the United States, on all particular projects which gentlemen have, no matter how important they may be, whether homestead bills, or Pacific railroad bills, or other railroad bills. They all sink into insignificance when looked upon in comparison with the general principle which covers the whole. Under the uniform practice of the Government, and the language of the Constitution , it would seem to require that, there should be an immediate consideration of the bill returned, with the objections of the President; so that I hope a later day than Monday next will not be fixed by the senate to the purpose of its consideration. | |
| 20 | I do not mean, for one moment, to go into a discussion now of the principles involved in this measure. The time to do so will be when the day assigned for the consideration of this bill arrives; and surely the practice of the Government requires that an early day should be assigned. I prefer the form of my own resolution to that of the honorable Senator from Ohio; but it is very immaterial. Both, I believe, assign Monday next as the day for proceeding to the consideration of the objections of the President to the bill which has been passed by Congress. In doing that, I have followed the precedents as I have found them existing in the history of congressional proceedings. I have followed that, in the first instance, of a veto by the President, and also the case which happened after the lapse of some forty years. These proceedings cover the case now before us, and should govern the action of the Senate upon it. | |
| 21 | Mr. CHASE. I ask that my resolution as it now stands be read. | |
| 22 | Mr. BADGER. What is the motion before the Senate? | |
| 23 | The PRESIDENT. The pending question is on the motion made by the Senator from California, to postpone the consideration of the subject until Monday week. | |
| 24 | Mr. CHASE. I ask the Senator from California to accept the resolution which I send to the chair and I ask that it maybe read. The resolution is as follows: | |
| 25 | Resolved, That Monday next be assigned for the consideration of the bill entitled "An act making a grant of the public lands to the several States of the Union for the benefit of indigent insane persons," returned by the President, with his objections. | |
| 26 | Mr. BRODHEAD. I desire to suggest to the Senate that we either take a vote now on this bill, and let the discussion come up upon the homestead bill, or postpone it for two weeks. Why, sir, there is very little discussion to be had upon this bill. We considered it before we sent it to the President. We considered it yesterday. Several gentlemen discussed it at considerable length. Many of the reasons given in the message operate against the homestead bill. I know that there are several Senators who desire to discuss our land policy; but their remarks can as well be made on the homestead bill. I therefore suggest that, by common consent, we take the vote now, or postpone it to the time indicated by the Senator from California. | |
| 27 | Mr. WALKER. I was much gratified by the suggestions and remarks of the Senator from Illinois, -Mr. Shields.- He seemed to propound the question to me, whether I believe the time between now and next Monday week sufficient for the disposition of the homestead bill. My impression is that it is not a sufficient time. I agree with him that we should postpone the consideration of the bill returned by the President until after we shall have considered the homestead bill; and, assuming the time up to next Monday week to be insufficient for the consideration of the homestead bill, I should be pleased, for one, to see this lull postponed until the Monday following that, so as to be two weeks from Monday next. | |
| 28 | I cannot appreciate the argument that is used, that we are showing a greater amount of respect to the President by hastily proceeding to the consideration of his message, than by postponing it to a future day, and giving gentlemen time to reflect on it, and to make up their minds and arguments for or against the message. I do not think that the early consideration of this matter involves any very grave consideration; any great importance. Why, will not the matter be as well considered two weeks from next Monday as to-morrow? If gentlemen take time to reflect, and to consider for themselves -- to make up their minds and their arguments -- the probability is, that it would be considered better at a future day than to-morrow. In the mean time, we can take up this kindred subject -- the homestead bill -- mentioned by the Senator from Illinois. There are many Senators here who, for quite a number of sessions, have been very an anxious to get that matter to something like a final vote in the Senate; and they have been, as often as they manifested that desire, put off, and the bill postponed, in consequence of something else before the Senate which was deemed of greater importance by the body; and it does seem that this subject is the most unfortunate one that can possibly be mentioned in the Senate. I have known gentlemen who, at the present session of Congress, have manifested the greatest anxiety for the consideration of the homestead bill, and the greatest anxiety for its passage, who were the most marked, apparently, in their determination, on all previous occasions, to postpone it to whatever came up. Some have always preferred propositions to grant land warrants to soldiers; others prefer railroad bills; others this thing, and others that; and everlastingly it seems that the consideration of the homestead bill must be postponed. Now, we have this message. It is conceded that the discussion upon it can about as well come upon the homestead bill. Then, I inquire, why not postpone it for at least two weeks, and in the mean time take up the homestead bill, which is the special order? If I am correct, the Senator from Ohio -Mr. CHASE- introduced his resolution, leaving the day blank. I intended to move to insert, "two weeks from Monday next;" but, from the reading of the resolution, it would seem that the blank has been filled with "Monday next." I therefore, before taking my seat, move to strike out " Monday next," and insert "two weeks from Monday next." | |
