Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-04-27


secretary of War, said to no involved, did or
ana not amount TO fraud was matter OF opinion,
oht wholly irrelevant as testimony.
Mr.. Wayne explained. JIo had made his former
objection under misopprchcnSion, having, at the
moment, forgotten that the House had sanctioned
the IntcrrogItory. lie dSclaimcd any thing like
concert with the gcntcmln from New York, in the
interruption oftho witness, and was i'll favor of his
being permitted To proceed.
The question being whether the witness should
be allowed TO proceed
Mr. Vance demanded the yeas and nays, which
ordered
and disclaimer by Mr.. Stanbcry, of all intention
to acquit the respondent of fraud
Mo. Alexander moved for reconsideration of
the vote of the House, permitting the intcrroy,.
tory to which the witness was now answering, TO
be put.
The question Of reconsideration was argued by
McSsrs. lowctt, Doddridgc, McDufic, Burgess,
Boul!in, Patton and Sutherland, III very animated
speeches, particular report of which must for
the present he Deferred when
MIR. Stewart of Penn. moved the Previous
Question.
The House sustained the motion; the Previous
Question was put and carried; and the main u,ics.
ton being on the reconsideration
Mr.. III. Everett demanded the yeas and nays,
which were ordered; aud being taken stood as
follows: \ cas- 81, Nays Id.
MIR. Stanbcry, ct his own request, was excused
from voting.
rogatory. was going into argument to slcw the
improperly Of requiring the witness TO produce
evidence OF an imputaton which he denied, when
he was called to order by
MIR. Fielder, as arguing question which had
been twice settled by a vote of the House.
Mr.. Gcardslcy then moved that the witness be
Prccudcd from stating his belief OF any fraud ha-
wing been committed by Gen. Houston: he having
disclaimcd tho intention OF imputng fraud to him
in his printed speech.
MIR. Wicklitlc said this not the question the
gentleman had argued, He hoped the question
would be taken without debate.
Mr. Mercer i'll luircd whether it would be in order
to move the question of consideration
The Chair replied III the negative; when
MIR. Beardslcy supported his motion by a-gu-
mcnt drawn from the practice of Courts of Justice,
and the received rules OF evidence.
MIR. G. Allan moved TO amend the motion of Mr.. |
BcardSlcv by striking out its latter clause.
Mr.. BcarGslcy accepted the motion as Il modiiica-
ton.
Mr.. Taylor observed that his colleague had argu-
cd one question, and pointed his motion to another
moved to amend it, by striking out the word .'bc- |
lief" and inserting in lieu thereof the word ''cvi. |
dcnce." Mr. II. denied that the witness had stated
any belief; what he had begun TO state was eui-
dencc. SO that, if The gentleman wanted TO stop
him, lie should put the motion its true ground |
Mr.. Thompson, of Georgia moved to lay the |
motion, amended. upon tho table.
The Chair pronounced il not to DO in order, un
der the rules adopted by the House in relation to
this trial, to receive such motion.
MIR. Stanbcry inquired what part of the testimo-
ny II was that the gentleman objected to!
Alter some discussion as to order, the amendment
of Mr.. Taylor rejected.
Mr.. Craig offered an amendment, Il copy of
which could not be obtained but which was un-
dcrstood to preclude all testimony relating to the
fraud.
Mr.. Carson demanded the Previous Question.
But the Chair decided that that motion could not
be received under the rules.
Mr.. Craig's amendment rejected.
Mr.. Bates, of Missouri, moved to amend the
motion of Mr. BcardsIcy by adding to it the words
but may be permitted TO state any facts going to
prove it,"
Mr. Vance suggested Il modification of the
amendment, by striking out the word facts" and
inserting in lieu thereof, the words "cyidcncc he
then had now has"
MIR. Bates accepted the notifications and the mo-
ton, thus amended was agreed TO, in the fol- |
lowing form:
That the witness be precludcd from stating his !
belief of fraud committed by Gen. Houston, but ,
may be permitted TO state any evidence he then |
had, or now has, going to prove it,"
Mr.. Bcards'cy was about to offer another rcsolu-
ton when
Mr.. Sutherland objected to it, as out of order;
inasmuch as the rules of proceeding required, that,
when an objection had been discussed, and decided
on, the examination of the witness should proceed
The chair sustained the objection.
The witness then resumed his testimony; but had
said only few words, when
Mir. Bcardelcy moved his resolution, in the fol-
lowing words:
''That the witness be prccluded from giving ov-
idcncc Of any fraud committed by, or participated
in, by Samuel IIouston; and which is not in the
printed speech of said witness imputed to said
Houston"
Mr.. McDuiiic said he not in the habit of
making such Il E,siion lie should now make; but
this measure of such an extraordinary charac-
ter that he must demand the Yeas and Nays.
Mr.. Dickson moved to postpone farther proceed
ing in the trial until II o'clock tomorrow in order
to allow an opportunity for having of the rules
of proceeding altered.
MIR. Irwin demonstrated against the attempt to
shGckle the witness
Mr.. Burgess requested Mr.. Dickson to withdraw
his motion.
Mr.. Dickson complied, and withdrew his motion
for postponcmcmt.
Mr.. Vinton now moved to lay Mr.. Bcardslcy's
motion upon the table
The chair pronounced this motion not in or
der.
Mr.. Ninton appealed from that decision to the
House, on TIE ground that the motion Of Mr.
Bcardslcy did not come within the rule of proceed.
ing referred TO by the Chair; when, after rather
brisk discussion on the point of order, between Mr.
Vinton and the Speaker, Mr. Bcardsey Withdrew
his resolution
The witness now proceeded and, in the course Of
his testimony, produced an affidavit of Luther Blake
relating to certain conversations between himself
and the respondent, touching bids for contract for
rations to the cmigratiug Indians, in which the ac
cusGd had proposed TO him to buy up the bids of
Prentiss and others, with view get the contract
for themselves at higher rate.
Mr.. Key objected to having this afndavit rccciv-
ed, unless Inc might be permitted first to put certain
questions TO Tic witness as 10 the ,Janncr in which
II had been taken.
The Speaker was about to put the question on
granting this permission to the the Counsel, when
Mr.. Adams observed that it not competent
for the Counsel TO mt any such queries TO tho wit