the liberties, rights, and welfare of my country, for
all parts of it."
"If this bill be passed," said Mr. Banks, "in my belief there will be
no loyal party known and no loyal voice heard in any of these States,
from Virginia to Texas."
Many members subsequently presented arguments and opinions for and
against the bill, in speeches limited to fifteen minutes in length.
This occupied a session protracted until near midnight.
On the following morning, February 19th, a vote was taken, and the
House refused to concur in the amendments of the Senate, and asked a
Committee of Conference.
The action of the House having been announced in the Senate, that body
immediately proceeded to consider a motion made by Mr. Williams, that
they insist on their amendment and agree to the conference. The
proposition to give the subject into the hands of a Committee of
Conference was opposed by many Senators, who thought a question of so
much importance should be deliberated upon in a full Senate. If such a
committee were appointed, their report could only be adopted or
rejected without modification or amendment. They would only have the
power which they possess over a nomination by the President--power to
reject a nominee without naming another.
"The result arrived at by the Senate in reference to this bill," said
Mr. Conness, "was after the most mature consideration that was ever
given to any proposition that came before this body, resulting in an
unanimity, at least on this side of the chamber, unparalleled in
legislative proceedings--a result hailed by the country at large,
demanded by the most intelligent and powerful of the American press,
alike acceptable to the industrial and commercial interests of the
country, which suffer from a continual disorganization of the country
affecting its vital industries."
"The fact that it is a very important bill," said Mr. Williams, "only
makes it the more necessary, as it seems to me, to adopt the usual
practice in such cases"--that of appointing a Committee of Conference.
Mr. Sumner favored the appointment of such a committee. The Senate had
made its best endeavor, the House had refused to concur, and now to
ask that body to vote upon the question again without a Committee of
Conference would kill the bill. In such a case there could be no hope
during the session for any just and beneficent measure either of
protection or reconstruction.
Mr. Fessenden had taken no part in the deba
|