A Book of the United States / Exhibiting its geography, divisions, constitution, and government ... and presenting a view of the republic generally, and of the individual states; together with a condensed history of the land, from its first discovery to the present time. The biography of about two hundred of the leading men: a description of the principal cities and towns; with statistical tables

by Unknown

This measure was powerfully sustained by the friends of the manufacturing interests in the country. But it met with great opposition. Every inch was contested. Great excitement prevailed, both in and out of congress. Parties were nearly equally balanced on the question; and, for a time, serious apprehensions were entertained as to its fate. But, at length, (July 16th,) the bill passed—in the house, by a vote of 116 to 112,—in the senate, (August 5th,) by a vote of 25 to 23.

Thus was decided, a question, which, in the view of many, was of incalculable importance to the country; one, certainly, which had interested all hearts, and had given birth to debates, as warm and animated, as any which had been listened to for years. All eyes were now turned towards the Executive, upon whom devolved the fearful responsibility of approving or rejecting it.

In a few days, the decision of the President was communicated to congress—he had rejected it—had added another veto to those which had already filled his friends with surprise and regret.

At the opening of the extra session of congress, the President had himself recommended a distribution of the proceeds of the public lands among the states; and an act was accordingly passed to that effect; but it ordained “that if at any time, during the existence of that act there should be an imposition of duties or imposts, inconsistent with the provision of the act of the 2d of March, 1833, and beyond the rate of duties fixed by that act, to wit., 20 per cent. on the value of such imposts, or any of them, then the distribution should be suspended, and should continue so suspended, until the cause should be removed.” The bill now presented to the President for his consideration provided, that notwithstanding the duties were raised beyond 20 per cent., the distribution should be made. On this ground principally the veto was based.

The friends of a judicious tariff were thus placed in a most embarrassing situation. It had been their intention to adjourn soon after the passage of this important measure; but, under this unexpected defeat and embarrassment, what should they do? Not a few were for closing the session, and placing the responsibility upon the President. But the country was suffering; the creditof the government was sinking lower and lower. Something must be done. Another effort must be put forth. Sacrifice must be made.

While the judicious and patriotic men in congress were thus deliberating as to the path of duty, a committee of the house, at the head of which was Mr. Adams, to whom the veto message of the President had been referred, reported. After reviewing the course which the Executive had pursued—his repeated attempts to frustrate the action of congress by the exercise of the veto—“that regal power of the constitution,” they observed; “the whole legislative power of the Union has been for the last fifteen months, with regard to the action of congress, upon measures of vital importance, in a state of suspended animation, strangled by the five repeated strictures of the executive cord.” “The will of one man has frustrated all the labours of congress, and prostrated all their powers.” “The power of the present congress to enact laws essential to the welfare of the people, has been struck with apoplexy by the Executive hand.” In such terms, did the committee speak of the alarming and unreasonable exercise of the veto power by the President. Two counter reports were made by members of the committee, who dissented from the report.

On the 17th of August, the house passed upon the tariff bill returned by the President. The vote stood 96 to 87—two thirds not voting in the affirmative, as required by the constitution, the bill was rejected.

On the 22d of August, the same revenue bill, which had been vetoed by the President, was passed by the house, 105 to 102, with the exception of the section concerning the land fund, and the duties upon the articles of tea and coffee, which were omitted. “We do not remember ever to have witnessed, during thirty-five years attendance at the house of representatives,” said the editor of the Intelligencer, “a more exciting scene, a severer contest, a greater earnestness and self devotion, than characterized the proceedings and votes on this bill.” Many were reluctant to strike out the land clause, and thus yield to what they considered prejudice and obstinacy on the part of the President—but the exigencies of the country demanded the sacrifice at their hands, and in the spirit of patriotism they made it.

On the 27th of August, the bill with amendments passed the senate by the close vote of 24 to 23, and on the 29th these amendments were concurred in by the house; and the bill, soon after, received the signature of the President, and became a law of the land.

The report of the committee on the veto of the President of the revenue bill has already been noticed. Against this report, the President on the 30th of August entered his solemn protest, transmitted to the house in a special message. “I protest,” said he, “against this whole proceeding of the house of representatives, as ex parte and extra judicial. I protest against it, as subversive of the common right of all citizens to be condemned only upon a fair and impartial trial, according to law and evidence before the country. I protest against it as destructive of all the comity of intercourse between the departments of this government, and destined, sooner or later, to lead to conflict fatal to the peace of the country, and the integrity of the constitution. I protest against it in the name of that constitution, which is not only my own shield of protection and defence, but that of every American citizen. I protest against it in the name of the people, by whose will I stand where I do, and by whose authority I exercise the power which I am charged with having usurped, and to whom I am responsible for a firm and faithful discharge,according to my own convictions of duty, of the high stewardship confided to me by them. I protest against it in the name of all regulated liberty and all limited government, as a proceeding tending to the utter destruction of all checks and balances of the constitution. And I respectfully ask that this, my protest, may be entered upon the journal of the house of representatives, as a solemn and formal declaration, for all time to come, of the injustice and unconstitutionality of such a proceeding.”