Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-05-23

thrown away because At &Id no; contain ali that
they desired!
MIR. Mangun made some explanations to the
ground on which he had determined TO ote for
ceding. He had been opposed to the bill from
the first, in any and every form. lie had attended
to the report OF the Judiciary committee, since
the Senate had determined TO adhere and he saw
was the fixed determination of the friends of the
measure to reject the bill, and let the responsibility
fall where it might. Now, he did believe the
All end:nen, of the Senate to be proper. And the
question thea presented itself, whether he should
vote for that which he consider ed as itself wrong,
for the sake OF obtaining VIVA, he thought desi-
rable end And he decided, every man OF cor
rect moral principles must decide not to do So
He should, therefore, not that the House ad-
here TO its disagr he thought the amend
ment right, but should vote that this House do
cede from its disagreement.
Mr.. Brent, believing that the sentiments OF every
gentleman made up the bill, moved the
previous question-but withdrew his motion at the
request o!
Mr. Wright, who said, that, having been called
upon as he had been by the gentlemen from Massa
chuseits, who presided with so much credit over
the Judiciary Committee, while he felt it his duty
to assure that gentleman that he had intended to
offer him personal dsrespect he felt it proper,
aso assure him, that what he did in the discharge
OF his duty in this House, he felt desire 10
evade or escape from. He had been told in round
numbers, that nothing which that gentleman had
said to day initiates in the slightest degree against
what he had said in The committees report FRI
day last and he called upon under the denun-
! citation that he should not escape-he had no wish
TO escape-ard lac would read the whole !. the par
agraph of which that gentleman had read 10 the
House only part. Here Mr. w. quoted the
report more al large
Il caiI b.h bal caJ ,r.ia ha 4
the report read in The committee, and since, in Ibis
House, that the argument had been drawn up with
the express view of satisfying the House that the
! Senate's amendment such as ought 10 induce
them rejec; the bill rather Than adopt it. He ar
guel this, well for the tenor of the report, as
| from the resolution with which it concluded VIZ :
| that the committee felt themselves obliged TO re-
commend that the House adhere to its disagreement
! If this consistent with what had fallen from
the honorable gentleman 10 day. the latte surely
cannot he argument ntended 10 induce the
House to recede from its disagreement As he
concluded, the self things could hardly be in
tended to persuade the House both to adhere and
rscede One word TO the gentleman from Tennes-
see
I Here Mr. Webster interpcsed, and begged, be-
fore the gentleman should leave him, 10 bring the
point little nearer TO the gentlemans recollection
That point was Tor the gentleman to designate
wherein he had, the floor, contradiced the posi-
tons taken in the report. The gentleman would
take notice that lie had said the House ought
recede-lse had not persuaded them 10 recede-he
had not said that he himself should vote TO recede
from the disagreement, 10 the Senate's amendment.
i Mr. Wright replied, that lie had all along sup.
posed the gentleman had been persuading the House
TO recede, whilst his report proposed an adherence
to its Disagreement and, he still understood H.
an argument to recede an argument TO adj
here. He did not see how he could be more ex-
Lii, Il
reply to Mr.. Polk, referring to the report of the
Committee the judiciary, virtually expressing
the opinion which he had said no gentleman
would so Tar hazard his legal reputation as tc
maintain.
Mr. Mangum asked if vote to recede from it.
disagreement would be equivalent TO a vote to
agree TO the Senate's amendment?
: The Chair replied that it would be.
, Mr.. Cook demanded that the question on indie
finite pOstpone,nent should be taken by Yeas ant
| Nays: which ordered by the House
| MIR. Webster then inquired if the House shoulC
refuseto postpone the bill indefinitely, whether i
would be in order to sInend the Senacs amend
ment, and send it back TO the Senate?
, The Chair replied that It would.
The question was then taken by yeas and NAYS
on the question Of indefinite postp onement, as iu
lows:
YEAS M's'r'. Adlam' of Penn Allen, Of Mass Aston
angel Archer Armstrong Ashley baldwin, Bartlett, BArey
Baiher of Con Bi,set, Deece bradley, Brown Burr,s
Campbell, Carson, Cary, Conflict Courier, Crunp Deiz
Dwight, Elstman Edwards, Of IA Findiay OHIO Te syh
o'dcs, Garrison, ovan, Harris, Harvey, laslrouch HAY.
den HemPh!l Humphrey Insesol, In;hain, Jouson Of
Jobnson Of Va keog-, kremer, L1ilmop Lincoln Long
mailary, Eansun, Markell, MtitrEdalr R1Iv, " T. Mat
to,k, DCOy, Mclean, Of Ohio, Mcneil, Mech Mercer
M'rwin Of Conn. Miller, Of N " Miller III Pa Miner Johr
MITCHELL Newt OBrien, Oar Phelps Plunicr, Powell Roe
K1'' Sawyer, Sloane, Srr'sue, Stevenson, Of Pa Sio,
strong, swan TaiIaf.5o, Tatsl Tay9r Va Thomson OF
Geo Thompson ot Ohio, romlnon Tucker. of s. c. Vance
Ynrianoh, Vm'on, Wales Weeins, White, Wltenore
Whitcscy, Williams wilson, s. e. Wilson, If Ohio " m
W0'rsi oi ONO, Wright, Wmts-g9
NANS-Messis. Alexander, OF Tenn. AuLer.or D,;Ic,.
Badger, Barbour Of W. Barney Biyiics Blair Boon Bent
Clarke Coo' Cook, Crywninshi,d D,s, Davenport, Dor
Hnrley Hamilton, Haynes, Bcay Henry ierriek nc To-
bart iione', Houston iusunn, Lark Jenning. OF Indian
Jane Johnson Francis johnson, Kide Lawrence Leeop
Leci Little, L'vng-lon, Locke, NIar4hle Markley Mafn
aleDuhe, Mokee NJ, Lane, Of Del Mean EIe;caifc jane
Mitchell, Mitchell, NJ lid. Mitchell, Of Tenn Moore Of
hen Moore Allah Owen Pcaroe Peter, Polk Reed Sand,
Saunders, Scott. Sill, Smith, Stevenson virginia Ste-
re', IhomP'n Of Pa Irt1yant, Tmblc, Tucker, of J.
Van Home, Vsrnum, Ward, Wrhster, Whippir Wicklige
James Wilson, Wood, Of - Y. Wonhington Younr.-sa
ed)
IN SENATE
! WEDNESDAY, May II, 1926,
On motion OF Mr.. Harrison, the Senate took II r