The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 24
xxiv, 696 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
24
CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
tion which had had the slightest influence on his
mind, was, that he believed the paper had been read
irregularly, and had got on the journal by an indi-
rect movement without the sanction of the House;
and therefore it was that he condemned it. It was
not for anything in relation to the paper itself; for he
cared not whether it were spread on the journal or
not. He should not object to its being recorded on
the journal, if those gentlemen who felt an interest
in it, desired that it should be so recorded at length,
that it might go down to posterity as an _ argument
in this particular case; nor should he object, if the
gentlemen whose seats were involved in the decision
of this question should prepare another paper, and
spread it on the journal, so that both sides might be
transmitted to posterity for its instruction or amuse,
jnent; but in relation to the present business of the
House, he could not see how it was a matter of im-
portance whether the paper was recorded or exclu-
ded; and therefore he would suggest to the gentle-
man from New York to withdraw all these indirect
propositions, and come directly to a proposition to
put this paper on the journal and for such proposi-
tion he (Mr. Q-.) would vote; for, whatever influence
the protest might have on posterity, it certainly
could have no effect on this House.
Mr. HAMLIN said, it occurred to him that he
was right in the course he had taken; and the gen-
tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Winthrof,] need
be under no alarm, even if the majority should adopt
the resolution he had submitted. If he understood
the facts in this case, (and he had paid particular at-
tention to them,) they were thus: While this body
was convened in this hall, and before the House
was organized, the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Barnard] rose in his place and presented to the
convention, before the House was organized, a
certain paper. What were the contents of that
paper, they had not, to this time, any evidence before
them; but on a subsequent day, the same gentleman
rose in his place, and proposed to amend the journal
of this House; and offered a paper, which he said
was the paper which he offered the day preceding,
but which was never read to the House. If he un-
derstood the ruling of the Chair aright in this matter,
it was, that all papers which were presented for the
action of this House, and entertained by the House,
have, according to the precedents, been spread at
length on the journal when the yeas and nays were
ordered thereon.
It had been said (and no one had attempted to
deny it) that there was 110 evidence that the paper
which the gentleman had offered on Monday was
the paper which he offered on Tuesday. He was,
of course, willing to take the gentleman's word in
regard to it; but he was speaking of the evidence
which, as a legislative body, they should require.
What was the tendency of such a course as this?
If they were to have spread upon the journals, by an
indirect method, that which the House would not re-
ceive when offered directly, what would be the con-
sequence? Why, a member might rise in his place
with a proposition; no matter how absurd it might
be, if he could only find one-fifth of the members
of that House willing to join him in calling for the
yeas and nays, the proposition would be spread at
length upon the journal. He objected to this mode
of proceeding altogether.
The record of the proceedings of this House was
not the record of the Clerk. He was a sworn offi-
cer of the House, it was true; but the House itself
was bound to keep a record of its proceedings.
Was it competent, then, for the sworn Clerk to en-
ter upon the journal of the House that which a
majority of the House kad decided to reject? The
House alone was answerable for the record,
and not the Clerk. He was of opinion, there-
fore, that, in all matters pending before the
House, and in which a majority had deter-
mined that a paper should not go upon the
journals, there should be a rule directing the
Clerk of the House to omit at length such paper.
It would, of course, be necessary that the statement
of the proceedings should be sufficiently descriptive
of the paper to make it intelligible. He was in fa-
vor of entering upon the journals all that the House
actually did do, but not what it did not do. He
was in favor of making thp journal of the House
show the whole action of the body, and no more;
but he was not in favor of permitting a paper to be
placed upon the journals which a majority of the
House has decided shall not be placed there. For
these reasons, he had thought it right to offer the
proposed amendment; and it did seem to him that the
amendment was strictly in accordance with the sug-
festions of the gentleman from Virginia. If he
ad not mistaken the point of order raised by the
gentleman—if he had not mistaken the point which
was ruled in by the Chair, (though, perhaps, not
very good authority,)—the ruling of the Chair of
last session was in accordance with the proposition
which he had submitted. And he was fully per-
suaded, upon examination, that the proposition
would be found to meet the views of a majority of
the House.
Mr. BARNARD said it would give him, per-
sonally, great pleasure to accommodate the gentle-
man from Virginia; but he confessed the suggestion
of the gentleman appeared to him a little extraordi-
nary. The gentleman, if he understood his observa-
tions, complained that the proposition to spread the
paper upon the journals was not a direct one; that he
proposed to get it spread upon the journal in an in-
direct mode. Sir, said Mr. Barnard, the proposi-
which I made was a direct proposition. It was a
direct proposition that the paper should be spread
upon the journals of the House. It was as direct a
proposition as it was possible for me to make. I did
it, to be sure, in the form of an amendment of the
journal; but I introduced a resolu tion reciting a pa-
per; and the effect of this course is, that if the House
sees fit to record the proceedings which took place on
the first day upon the journals, that paper will go on
the journal as a matter of course. It stands, then, in
its most appropriate place, and is introduced in the
most appropriate way, and the records will be made
up in the most intelligible manner.
Sir, if the gentleman from Virginia, and his friends
and others on this floor, were disposed to record this
paper, they could not have a more fit opportunity
than has been offered to them. No objection, that I
can conceive of, can arise against the proposition
which I have made; certainly, no technical or consti-
tutional objection.
Mr. GILMER said the gentleman did not seem
precisely to understand the nature of the difficulty
which he (Mr. G.) had hinted at. It was this:
The gentleman from New York moved on Tuesday
to amend the journal of the preceding day. Well,
it was impossible for any one to vote with him upon
this proposition who did not believe there was an
error in the journal of the preceding day. That was
the whole point involved m the proposition. It was
apparent that the paper could, by 110 possibility,
have gone upon the journal of the first day; and,
therefore, there was no error. It would have been
impossible for him and those who thought with
him to vote for the amendment of the journal so
long as there was no error; and the only proper
mode of getting the paper upon the journal would
be by a direct proposition to spread it upon the
record.
Mr. BARNARD said he thought he perceived
where the difficulty lay with the gentleman from
Virginia. It seemed to him to be purely an abstract
difficulty. Practically, he could see 110 difficulty
in the ease. What was the history of the pro-
ceeding' Why, when that body came together
for the purpose of organizing itself, a mem-
ber rose in his place, as he had a constitu-
tional right to do, and claimed to read a paper which
he held 111 his hand It was objected to; and then an-
other member rose and moved that the first mem-
ber have leave to read the paper. The question
is put to the House and permission is refused, the
journal is made up, and made up without the slight-
est notice whatever of the transaction; and, 011 the
following day, a motion is made to amend the jour-
nal so that it should show the facts of the case.
This was the proposition which, it appeared to him,
need disturb 110 man's conscience to vote for, who
was willing to have the records of Congress go
down to prosterity in a correct and accurate form.
But to the proposition more immediately before
the House. After the House had stricken out
from the resolution that part which recited the pro-
test, the gentleman from Maine moved to amend the
resolution by directing the Clerk, in making up.
the journal to be read to-morrow, to omit the protest
It was a grave question to touch upon—something
more than the question before the House. In his
opinion, it affected the Constitution itself; and it af-
fected, also, the oath which the Clerk of the House
had taken. The House was taking upon itself to
instruct, beforehand, the Clerk to omit a certain
paper which formed a part of the proceedings.
How should the Clerk record the proceedings with-
out inserting that paper? The question had been
taken by yeas and nays; and he was, therefore,
bound to insert it. If there was any one thing
plainer than another, it was that one-fifth of the
members of the House have the right to have the
yeas and nays recorded on every question. He
begged that gentleman would desist from piling up
one act of nullification upon another in this manner.
They had nullified an act of Congress by the intro-
duction of certain members into that House, and
they now proposed to nullify the Constitution by
instructions to their Clerk. The Clerk of that
House could not discharge his duty to that House,
and have a due regard to his own oath, without in-
serting the whole resolution which had been origi-
nally moved.
The framers of the Constitution knew very well
what they were about; they did not need to be in-
structed. They knew that minorities have rights, and
they knew the importance of preserving those rights.
And they knew the importance of having great le-
gislative questions accurately recorded for the in-
struction of the present time, as well as of posterity.
They therefore directed that this body should keep
a journal; and any direction on the part of the
House to a sworn officer to mutilate that journal,
should be treated by that officer as a nullity. His
oath was above the order of the House. He had
sworn to support the Constitution, and he could
never keep his oath unless he entered a correct ac-
count of the proceedings of the day upon the jour-
nal. After all, what was it that members were con-
tending for? Why should they be so tenacious about
rejecting a paper from the records of the pro-
ceedings of that House? It was a part of the
solemn proceedings of the body. There was noth-
ing in it objectionable—nothing unbecoming. Were
they afraid that the journal would be defiled by the
record? Then why not let it remain where it stood?
It could do no possible harm, but, 011 the contrary,
would be a useful precedent to all future time—a
precedent which, he trusted, their successors would
not disregard. The tone of moderation indulged
by the minority upon this subject; the disinclina-
tion manifested, notwithstanding the strong opinions
in regard to their rights, entertained by the minori-
ty, to disturb the organization of the body, or delay
its proceedings;—all these things were important,
and it was highly necessary that they should ap-
pear upon the journals.
But that was not all. They had the paper already
upon the journal: how were they to get rid of it?
The gentleman from Virginia had made a difficulty,
inasmuch as he asserted that the proposition did not
seem to be a direct one. How would gentlemen
meet the question when it came up, to strike out the
whole record of the paper? and who did not per-
ceive that a proposition to strike out was a prop-
osition to falsify the journal? He did not understand
how any man could entertain such a proposition for
a moment. He hoped the gentleman's friends would
induce him to withdraw his amendment; for they
would find themsehes involved in inextricable dif-
ficulty.
Mr. THOMPSON was somewhat surprised at
the perseverance which some members, ana particu-
larly the member Worn New York, [Mr. Barnard,]
had shown in endeavoring to get this protest spread
upon the journal. It certainly did not appeal* to
him to blaze over with so much wisdom as to ren-
der any one anxious to hand down to posterity that
which was false in itself; for it was no part of the
proceedings of Monday, and nobody pretended that
it was. No member of the House, who had not
seen the paper, knew anything about it. It was not
received, read, or entertained for a moment; and no-
body therefore could know what it was. Let the
tacts, then, stand on the journal as they occurred,
viz: that the gentleman from New York offered a
paper to the House, which was not received or read,
without stating what it was. Gentlemen now asked
the House to do by indirection what they could not
do by direction; and therefore now was the proper
time to establish the rule, if ever they established
any at all, whether a member, guided by any feel-
ings which might influence members, may cumber
your journal with any kind of documents. Why
he could, if this principle were sanctioned, make the
journal so large that no library could contain it.
i*", explained that it would require
0nJ} ^le present, calling for the yeas
and nays, to authorize the insertion of extraneous
matter on the journal.
Mr. THOMPSON continued. Well, suppose X
1*love fo amend the journal by the insertion
of Hutton's Mathematics, and there should be fifty
members on this floor mischievous enough to call for
the yeas and nays, though not one to vote for it:
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/48/: accessed March 28, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.