190 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



some general act of legislation, to suspend the 

 writ of habeas corpus in South Carolina, South 

 Carolina being in open warfare, and for that 

 purpose $5,000 is appropriated in the bill for 

 the purpose of taking care of the prisoners 

 and to pay such expenses as may be necessary 

 in enforcing the law in South Carolina, and 

 then an amendment is moved which relates 

 to that appropriation, which is legislation, ad- 

 mitted to be so by the Chair, but which re- 

 lates to it. It passes through your first bar- 

 rier because there is no appropriation in it; it 

 passes through your second barrier because it 

 'relates to an appropriation;' and in that way 

 you introduce a proposition for the suspension 

 of the writ of habeas corpus in New York and 

 all over the North. You can do that under 

 this construction of the rule, and no man can 

 gainsay it if the ruling of the Chair is right." 



Mr. Anthony, of Rhode Island, said : " From 

 what the Senator from New Jersey has said, 

 there seems to have been a misunderstanding, 

 although how it originated I do not know. I 

 am not one of the Senators who gave any 

 pledges about this amendment not being pro- 

 posed, nor did I know until very recently that 

 it was to be proposed ; but the whole grava- 

 men, the whole complaint, as I understand 

 from the other side of the Chamber, is, that 

 whereas a month ago this amendment would 

 have been perfectly in order as a permanent 

 law, we have passed a rule by which it can 

 only be in order as applicable for the term for 

 which the appropriation bill now under con- 

 sideration applies. Two attempts have been 

 made by Senators on this side of the Chamber 

 to repeal that rule, and it was resisted I think 

 on both sides of the Chamber. I am sure it 

 was on the other side. Now, the only com- 

 plaint is the five-minutes rule. What evil that 

 rule accomplishes when Senators speak half 

 an hour, I do not see, because we all know, 

 and have abundant illustration that a motion 

 can be made to which the five-minutes rule 

 does not apply, by which a debate can go on 

 covering the whole ground of this amendment. 



"Now, I speak only for myself; but I say 

 if this rule, which is the cause of so much 

 complaint, is the only difficulty, I am quite 

 willing to rescind it, and let us stand just the 

 same as we did before the rule was adopted. 

 "We all know that a large portion of the legis- 

 lation since I have been in Congress, for twelve 

 or thirteen years, has been put on appropria- 

 tion bills ; and that is a very vicious system 

 of legislation, I think ; but it is one that has 

 always prevailed, and this bill itself has every 

 year been made the rider for legislation of 

 every character, covering every Department 

 of the Government, and going, as the Senator 

 from Ohio says, into every hamlet of the coun- 

 try." 



Mr. Morton: "I desire to make an appeal 

 to Senators on this side of the Chamber to 

 allow us to vote upon this amendment and 

 any amendments that may be offered by any 



of them, or by any other Senator. "When a 

 question of order arises, it must be decided 

 first by the Chair, and, if an appeal is taken, 

 then by the Senate. An appeal was taken 

 from the decision of the Chair in this case, 

 the Chair deciding the amendment to be in 

 order under this rule. The appeal was laid 

 on the table by a motion, which was in fact 

 an indorsement of the opinion expressed by 

 the Chair. 



" Now, I submit to our friends on this side 

 of the Chamber that this question has been 

 decided in the only way that it can be de- 

 cided; and, without imputing motives or pur- 

 poses to any Senator, I suggest that all should 

 submit to the decision when it is thus made." 



Mr. Tipton, of Nebraska, said: " There seems 

 to be some plausibility in the remarks of the 

 Senator from Indiana so far as this, that an 

 opportunity, at least a forced opportunity, may 

 be had for the purpose of discussing this prop- 

 osition ; but the point of objection is not met. 



"The point of objection is this: that al- 

 though the opportunity might be complete as 

 to the discussion of this and all kindred prop- 

 ositions, yet, after they have been discussed 

 until every person in the Chamber is satisfied 

 with the discussion, they are not legitimate as 

 amendments to an appropriation bill, and can- 

 not be pressed except in violation of the reso- 

 lution I have read, and violation of our solemn 

 pledges each to the other that no such propo- 

 sition as involves general legislation shall be 

 presented as an amendment to such a bill as 

 this." 



Mr. Robertson said: "We have been here 

 now over seventeen hours, with the exception 

 of two hours and a half of a recess to enable 

 us to get our dinners. It is very evident to 

 my mind that we cannot get a vote this morn- 

 ing upon this question ; and, if we do get a 

 vote upon this, there will be other questions 

 presented which will consume some time. I 

 have sat here very much against my own will, in 

 order to discharge my public duty, until I am 

 very nervous ; in fact, not well enough to sit 

 here much longer. I think there should be an 

 end to this thing. If we cannot accomplish the 

 public work by Monday, let us stay here a 

 week longer. I therefore move that the Sen- 

 ate do now adjourn." 



The question on adjournment being taken 

 by yeas and nays, resulted yeas 11, nays 28. 



The Presiding Officer : " The question is on 

 indefinitely postponing the bill." 



The question being taken by yeas and nays, 

 resulted yeas 5, nays 35. 



So the motion was not agreed to. 



Mr. Sunmer: "I now move to amend the 

 amendment by adding what I send to the 

 Chair." 



The Chief Clerk read the amendment, as 

 follows : 



Also that the act above mentioned be further sup- 

 plemented and amended by^ adding the following 

 provisions at the end of the eighteenth section. 



