Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

by the gentleman from Macomb, (Mr. MUSSEX,) shows the necessity of such an amendment, because from his experience in legislative matters he is entitled to speak upon the subject. I hope, therefore, that his amendment will prevail.

ments, as on other bills."

Mr. BLACKMAN. Would it not be necessary to insert a provision to that effect so that there may be no doubt in regard to the power of the Senate to make those amendments?

originate in either House. I see no objection to it. I know of no difficulty that has occurred that would be obviated by a change in this regard.

The question was then taken upon the amendment of Mr. MUSSEY, and it was not agreed to.

of Representatives, and then I would practicable for future Legislatures. leave the Senate at liberty to propose From the manner in which we elect amendments to those bills. members of the Legislature, I cannot see why one House should have the preference over the other in originating bills of this description. I think it is just as proper for bills appropriating Mr. BLACKMAN. I would like to money to be originated in the Senate inquire of the gentleman from Macomb Mr. MUSSEY. In my judgment as in the House. Senators are just whether he would have it so that the such a provision would not be necessary. about as near the people as members Senate may propose amendments to I propose to have the section provide of the House of Representatives. I these bills? I see in a similar provision that bills for the appropriation of pub- believe that ever since we had a Legisin the Constitution of the United lic moneys shall originate in the House lature the practice has been in regard States, in regard to raising revenue, of Representatives. That is all that to appropriations to allow bills to that the Senate is given power to pro- the section will provide upon the subpose amendments. The clause to which ject. I refer is as follows: Mr. BLACKMAN. The idea sug"All bills for raising revenue shall origin-gested itself to my mind from the fact ate in the House of Representatives; but the that the framers of the Constitution of Senate may propose or concur, with amend the United States seemed to think it Now, if it was deemed necessary to necessary to add such a provision in make this provision in the Constitution regard to the power of amendments Mr. P. D. WARNER. I move to of the United States, in connection by the Senate to a similar provision amend this section by inserting after with the other provision, lest it might in relation to the origination of bills the words "new bill," the words "exbe doubted whether the Senate could in the House of Representatives. I do cept appropriation bills;" so that it will offer an amendment to such bills, do not know that the Senate would not read: "but no new bill except approwe not need the same precaution here? have the power without such a pro- priation bills shall be introduced after Mr. MUSSEY. I will answer the vision. But the question might very the first forty days of a session shall gentleman. I would of course leave the naturally arise, whether the amending have expired." I offer this amendment Senate to propose such amendments a bill, so as to increase the amount without consultation with other memas they might deem best; otherwise, appropriated, would not in effect be bers of the committee. My object is it would be a mere formal matter to equivalent to originating a new bill for this: there have occasionally been insubmit such bills to the consideration that increased amount. I suppose that conveniences experienced under the of the Senate. I do not offer this is the reason why this provision was operation of the fifty day limitation in amendment SO much because I inserted in the Constitution of the our present Constitution. It has been object to the origination of such United States. necessary at times to resort to expedisuch bills Mr. HENDERSON. In the old ents in order to secure the passage of in the Senate; but I object to their originating in both Constitution we had a provision which such appropriation bills as the necesHouses at the same time. I do not has been read here, that bills might sities of the case seemed to require. I like very well to talk about my own originate in either House. The ques- can see no objection to allowing the experiences, but I have seen how this tion has never been raised that the committee of ways and means of the matter works. I know this much: that House in which the bills did not origin- House, and the committee of finance when a committee who have charge of ate had not a perfect right to make in the Senate, to confer together when such a bill come to the conclusion that amendments to those bills; nor would the Legislature has nearly completed they will appropriate a certain amount the question arise here. its session, and to report such approof money in the one House, a similar Mr. BLACKMAN. The gentleman priation bills as may be necessary after committee is considering the same bill does not "evidently understand the the limitation has expired. in the other House, and they also rec-point I make. The point was that The question was taken upon the ommend the appropriation of a cer- under a Constitution which did not amendment of Mr. P. D. WARNER, and tain amount of money. It seems to provide that a particular class of bills it was agreed to. me that some mode should be devised should originate only in one House,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Mr. M. C. WATKINS. I cannot

Mr. BLACKMAN. I move that the

committee now rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

chair,

to provide for these matters being con- either House had the right to make sidered in some other way, so that but amendments. But it is proposed here one appropriation for one object will to make a provision restricting the The motion was agreed to, upon a be recommended, and that we shall be origination of certain bills to one division; ayes 32, noes 27. able to get along much more satisfac- House. torily to all concerned than we now do. The committee accordingly rose; and At present, appliances are used to secure see any appropriateness in the amend- the PRESIDENT having resumed the appropriations for one object; after ment offered by the gentleman from qur sympathies have been wrought up Macomb, (Mr. MUSSEY.) His idea in that direction, appliances are seems to be that, in the first place, the brought to bear to secure appropria- sums should be fixed upon which the tions for another object, and our sym- Legislature may deem it necessary or pathies are turned in another direc- proper to appropriate, and then that tion, and thus we may find at last, that sum should be divided up among the we have appropriated four hundred several different objects for which apthousand dollars, when we should have propriations should be made. I do not appropriated only three hundred thou- understand that this has been the sand dollars. I would have the bills course of former Legislatures, and I for this purpose originate in the House doubt very much whether it would be

Mr. PRINGLE reported that the committee of the whole, pursuant to the order of the Convention, had had under consideration the article entitled "Legislative Department," had made some progress therein, and had directed him to ask leave for the committee to sit again.

[ocr errors]

Leave was accordingly granted..
Mr. MORTON. I move that the
Convention now adjourn,

[ocr errors]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[graphic]

Now, a political faction may take pos- Mr. BURTCH. Then would come Mr. BURTCH. Then would come session of the executive of the nation, what? If political action should fail and through its influence, that politi- to produce the results cal faction may control the power of what would come? Sir, it would be a man shall not have the power to conthe government, to the disparagement war; a war between the masses and trol the majority of the Legislature. of the best interests of the people. the classes. And whether it be repub- I understand the thing, I think. I The veto power has crippled the en- lican or whether it be democratic, it think that gentlemen, if they will look ergies of the State of Michigan, when matters not. We find this to be true to this matter, will see that the drift of it was exercised in Congress, against all the world over, that governments my argument is, that one man shall I the appropriations to be made and ex-are universally in the hands of the not take control of many men. pended in Michigan; and by means of classes, and out of the possession of say that when a majority have secured a faction, those appropriations were the masses. Now, sir, what will we the personal rights of men and their used in the South, for the benefit of find under the circumstances? We will rights of property, as they should be the South, and for the disparagement find that one of these parties being in secured in the fundamental law of any of the North. The same thing may power, being in possession of the gov- State, then it should be left to majoriapply to State government as well. ernment, being in possession of all the ties to control so far as the interests of But not only that; I see all around me, fortifications, of the army, of the navy, the State are concerned. What would strict where that there is a strong tendency to class. being in possession of the sword, and you think of a school When I use the term "class," I speak the treasury of the government, there one-third would get control of twoWhat would you think of of those men who have never labored will be a terrible war. It will be just thirds? or toiled, except by the brain in work-like all other wars, except the last one, such powers in a school district? How ing out means to rob the masses; we a war against tyranny and oppression. far advanced would the educational inhave seen a little of it in this govern- The last war we had was a war for the terests of the State of Michigan be, if ment, when under the pretence, that it purpose of oppression, unlike anything that rule was in operation in our school was necessary for certain purposes, the heard of before in the history of the districts? I apprehend they would be. as far in the back-ground as many of riches of the classes of this country world. have been exempted from taxes upon Now, sir, I hope that when we go those eastern cities which have been their capital, both in the State and in away from this hall we shall have quoted here as good authority in conthe nation. If this was the only in- adopted a system that will be adapted stitutional law. Rhode Island has stance that would occur, perhaps we to the true interests of the people; one been quoted here as good authority, might survive. But if these things are that will secure them against faction, yet that State neglected to adopt reto be constantly on the increase, and a bribery, and corruption; one that will publican principles in her institutions, distinction is to be drawn between the be an honor to the virtue and intelli- but kept the charter it received from moneyed institutions of the country gence of the great State of Michigan. King James until a revolution broke and the masses, I see before us a It is the right, and not only the right out in the State. That may be good

in the same manner. Under the rule bill over the Governor's veto. The
as laid down in this section, there will amendment of the gentleman from
be required sixty-seven members of the Clinton, (Mr. DANIELLS,) as stated by
House of Representatives to pass the the gentleman from Macomb, (Mr.
bill over the Governor's veto. If my MUSSEY,) would not require that num
amendment is adopted, a bill can be so ber; it would leave it so that a much
passed by two-thirds of the members less number than a majority of the
present, which is the rule, I think, in members elected could pass a bill over
the State of New York, and also in the the Governor's veto.
Congress of the United States.

authority for some gentlemen, but such
authority as that is no authority for me.
I say that all that is necessary here
in regard to this veto power is, that
after a veto message has been spread
upon the journal, and presented to the
understanding of the members of the
Legislature, then the majority of that
Legislature should control. Sir, is the
knowledge of one man superior to the
Mr. GIDDINGS. I do not propose
knowledge of fifty men? Because a Mr. MUSSEY. I cannot very well to make any argument on this ques-
man has been elected Governor, is sit quiet, if there is any probability tion. But there arises a difficulty in
there any more concentrated wisdom that that amendment will pass? It my mind about passing this section
in him than there was before he was will take but a moment's reflection to just as it stands. I suppose the House
elected Governor? Not a bit of it. see that it will require a less number of Representatives is generally like
He might improve a little if he of votes to pass a bill over a veto than this body, without a full number of
looked around him, and he might not; it would require to pass the bill in the members being present; seldom will
he might go the other way; he might first place. Suppose the House of there be more than eighty members
fall back. Suffice it to say, that I ap- Representatives was as full as the Con- present. In order to pass a bill over
prehend you will find in Congress, men vention is to-day. It would take fifty-the Governor's veto, according to this
who, it will be acknowledged, at least by one votes to pass a bill before it could section as it now stands, it would take
my Republican friends, to be equal in go to the Governor at all. Then when almost that number of votes. It strikes
capacity to the President; yet the it came back with his veto, if there me that members here must see that it
President can thwart the will of a were but a quorum of members pres- is worthy of consideration at least,
majority of the members in either ent, or if there were sixty-one mem- whether the number required to pass a
House. I apprehend that after you bers, as we have here to-day, forty-two bill over the Governor's veto, accord-
have elected a Governor in the State votes could pass the bill over his veto ing to this section, that is, two-thirds
of Michigan, you then have not se- according to this amendment. Now, of all the members elected, is not too
cured all the concentrated wisdom of if the Convention wish to place the large a number. I am not certain but
Michigan. Now, after the Governor matter in that position, then I think that is best. But I just make the sug-
has spread out at large his objections
gestion that the matter is worthy of
to any bill, the people of the great
our consideration, especially when we
State of Michigan, convened in the
find that in some States there is no
legislative hall, certainly have wisdom
such power granted to the Governor.
enough to understand whether the best
I think we shonld not pass over this
interests of the peoole and of the State
matter hastily or without considerable
of Michigan, would be carried out by
consideration.
passing the bill.

Now, I will refer you to one State in the Union whose Constitution was like what this would be, provided my amendment is adopted. That State does not now stand in very good favor; though you know that persons are liable to fall from grace, and so it is with States. I refer you to the State of Kentucky. That had a like Constitution to what this would be, provided that this amendment was made. I think it was a good one. I think it would be surer in many respects to promote the general welfare. Now, with these few remarks, I submit the matter to the consideration of the committee.

The question was taken upon the amendment of Mr. BURTCH, and it was not agreed to.

they should go back and strike out the
words, "a majority of members elect-
ed," which is the number required to
pass the bill in the first place.

Mr. DANIELLS. A majority of the
States of the Union do not require
two-thirds of the members elected to
pass a bill over the Governor's veto.
I do not think that more than one-
third of the States now in the Union,
require a two-thirds vote to pass a bill
over the Governor's veto. In many
States the Governor has no veto at all.
In Delaware the Governor is required
to sign a bill, no matter whether he
approves it or not.

[ocr errors]

Mr. MUSSEY. Are there many States which require only a majority of the number present to pass bills? If so, then there might be some consistency in requiring only that number to pass them over the Governor's veto.

Mr. GIDDINGS. I do not see how that affects this question one way or the other. I suppose the general rule Mr. TURNER. And in Maryland. is to require a law to be passed by the Mr. DANIELLS. I do not know majority; I have never been quite cerbut what it is so in Maryland. The tain about that. Some one suggested veto is generally considered, in the to me yesterday, that while the originpractice of various States in the Union, al law might be passed by a majority an anti-democratic power. If you re- of the members elected, that it would quire two-thirds of the members elected be better not to allow that law to be to pass a bill over the veto of the Gov-amended or changed except by a twoernor, I question if you can ever pass thirds vote. I am not certain that he any law over a Gevernor's veto. Our was not correct. But the question Governor would then have a one man arises whether this section does not repower. If the committee want to quire too great a number to pass the insert that, then they can do so. But bill over the Governor's veto. Ithink they will see the time, or our constituents will, when such a question as this will not pass by unheeded.

Mr. DANIELLS. I move to amend the third sentence of this section by striking out, after the word "members," the word "elected," and inserting the word "present." If that Mr. BLACKMAN. We just voted amendment is adopted, the sentence down a proposition of the gentleman will read, "on such reconsideration, if from Eaton, (Mr. BURTCH,) which did two-thirds of the members present not receive a single vote in its favor. agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, I think we would have done better to with the objections, to the other House, adopt that than the motion now made, by which it shall be considered." I because it proposed to require a mamove also to amend the next sentence jority of the members elected to pass a

*

Mr. MUSSEY. That is as much as to say that the position I took was inconsistent. I merely asked the Convention to be consistent. If we were to strike out the clause requiring a majority of the members elected to pass a bill in the first place, then it might be consistent to have but twothirds of those voting to pass a bill over the Governor's veto. If we should decide that, in a House of fifty-one mem

bers, twenty-six should be enough to gentleman from Clinton, (Mr. DAN-State of New York, an absurdity? I pass a law, that might be another IELLS,) I think it would be much more do not know but there are other States thing. But when we say it shall re- acceptable and appropriate to strike that require two-thirds of the members quire fifty-one, that is, the entire num- out all that relates to the veto power; elected to pass a bill over the Govif ber necessary to constitute a quorum, because the amendment would be re-ernor's veto; but there are very few, to pass a law in the first place, then I ducing the influence of the Governor any. Mr. MUSSEY. Does it require a think it would be inconsistent to allow below what it would be if he possessed thirty-six of that number to pass the no veto power at all. As has been re- majority of the members elected to law over the Governor's veto. Accord-marked, by the Constitution the votes Congress to pass a law? Mr. DANIELLS. No, sir; and that ing to the amendment now proposed of fifty-one members of the House are it would require fifty-one votes to get required to pass a bill in the first place. shows me the more necessity for adopta bill to the Governor, and then if it Should this amendment be adopted, ing the amendment which I have procomes back with his objections, thirty-thirty-four members could pass that posed. If a majority of the members six could pass it over his veto. same bill when returned by the Gover- elected approve a bill, that to me is Mr. MORTON. Thirty-four could nor with his objections. I submit that pretty good evidence that it is a bill do it; for thirty-four would be two- it would be preferable to my mind, and which the public good requires. Then thirds of fifty-one. more in accordance with my views of after the Governor has vetoed it, and the Mr. MUSSEY. Yes, sir, thirty-four propriety, to strike out everything in sent his reasons for that veto to could pass it over the Governor's veto, relation to the veto power, than to House in which the bill originated, if but it would require fifty-one to send adopt an amendment of this character. two-thirds of the members present the bill to the Governor in the first Mr. DANIELLS. Mr. Chairman, shall still think it is a proper law, I place. you will see that the comparison gen- think it is right they should have power Mr. TURNER. Is not that accord- tlemen make, is an extreme one in to make it a law, and be responsible to ing to the Constitution of New York? every instance. A bill may be passed the people for their action. Mr. CONGER. I wish to make a Mr. MUSSEY. Yes, sir; but as I by thirty-four votes if there is barely a The remark or two upon this subject. said a short time ago, precedents are quorum. But it is not a common good precedents if they are good in thing that there is barely a quorum provision in this section is the same as themselves. Now, if you will allow a present. My amendment provides the provision in the present Constitumajority to pass a bill, then it might be that the bill may be passed over the 'tion. Under the Constitution of 1835, well enough to require only two-thirds Governor's veto by two-thirds of the there was a provision like the one proof those voting to pass it over the members present. Under the other posed in this amendment: Governor's veto; that would be con- rule, if the House of Representatives "If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds sistent. But whatever the Convention should have present at any time the of all the members present agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, with the objections, to will decide I will submit to. I cannot, same number of members that are now the other House, by whom it shall likewise however, very well vote to have thirty- in this Convention, if every one of be reconsidered; and if approved also by should vote in favor four members pass a bill over the them two-thirds of all the members present in that House, it shall become a law.' Governor's veto, and require fifty-one a bill over the Governor's veto, The pending amendment would make to send a bill to the Governor in the it could not be passed. Now, I first placé. suppose that the most of us profess to our Constitution conform with the ConMr. GIDDINGS. I had supposed believe in a democratic form of govern-stitution of 1835. I do not remember, that we had got rid of all questions of ment That was my supposition when if I ever knew, what reasons induced consistency, we have been inconsistent I first came to this Convention; but the Convention of 1850 to change that so many times. What does our pres- my faith in that has been wonderfully rule; but undoubtedly some reason ent Constitution require? shaken. I do not believe a more con- existed which made it seem better that Mr. MUSSEY. It requires a ma-servative body has ever been assembled that rule should be changed, and that rity of all the members elected to in this State; that is they conserve the votes of two-thirds of all the memass a bill, and two-thirds of all the backwards. It seems to me that there bers elected, instead of those present, members elected to pass it over the has been no power vested in any thing should be required to pass a bill over Governor's veto. I do not advocate that rule; all I ask is, that we shall be consistent.

[graphic]

Mr. DANIELLS. I would ask if, during the last seventeen years, there has ever been a law passed over the Governor's veto?

of

the Governor's veto.

Mr. MCCLELLAND. Will the gentleman allow me to state the reason for that?

Mr. CONGER. Yes, sir!

which comes near to the people, except in the board of supervisors. We have the utmost confidence in the board of supervisors, but we have no confidence in anything else. It is proposed to vest the Governor with a power which Mr. MCCLELLAND. That change would give him practically a negative was made because, in many cases, a Mr. MUSSEY. Yes, sir; within the upon every bill that could be passed minority of each House passed bills last seventeen months; I am sorry the by the Legislature. Now, you might over the head of the Governor; actually gentleman's memory is so much at fault. have executives in this State who a minority of the members of each Mr. DANIELLS. I might have would have notions that would not House, according to the number elected. Mr. CONGER. known it at the time, but if so, I have comport with the wishes of the people, That of course forgotten it. But I might not have as expressed through their representa- would be the effect of the amendment, known it at all, and so might not have tives. Yet it would be in his power to if adopted. We can very well see that prevent the passage of any bill that such might be the case. But what I forgotten it. Mr. MUSSEY. I think if it had not should be presented to him by any referred to more particularly was, been for the excitement produced by Legislature hereafter convened in this whether there were any special cases the numerous vetoes of the Governor city. Sir, this is a most extraordinary which made such a rule improper. I last winter, this question would not power. Gentlemen talk about my have no doubt but that there are many have been agitated here at all. proposition being an absurdity. Is the gentlemen in this Convention who Mr. P. D. WARNER. If it is pro- practice in the Congress of the United think that after a bill has been vetoed posed to adopt the amendment of the States, or in the Legislature of the by the Governor, and his objections

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »