Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-05-01


he was in the habit of telling the truth and what was
the estimation in which he held in society But the
Counsel could not enquire into any specific vice. Mr..
w was constrained to object from that they were
violating the rules and principles observed by all rbu
mails in hearing testimony.
the question being about 10 be taken,
Mr. Irwin asked for the Yeas aud Nays and they were
ordered by the House.
Being taken, they stood as lollows-Yeas S. NAYS 10
query having been put by the counsel to what
Mr. Pen,ss had declared after the respondent had been
arrested under the order of the House
Mr. Huntington said that he should not object this
discussion being conducted in manner perfectly liberal
but he could not sit and witness examined as to
mere heasay declarations. He would not however de-
tain the House by any argument.
Mr. Key said that the enquiry was as TO the credit TO
be given to an pdTte affidavit of Blake il not
competent TO enquire under what circumstances had
been taken! He offering evidence the declarations
OF Prentss; in order 10 show the resentment and bitter
ness by which he acuatcd, and his determination to
have Houston convicted. Was that proper evidence!
ld II not Affect the character OF the adavip Was not
al the affidavit in the writing of Prcn,iss and taken
ut his instance? IL he could prove the declarations of
Prentiss, and 10 show why and how the affidavit was
taken, would ii not enable the House Judge how lar the
affidavit was credibc' As here and &c parte he
should at least prove the declarations of the at whose
instance it had been taken
Mr.. Huntington replied that VIM. Prentis was not on
trial and was not witness. When paper was read if
the party was not in Court, inquiry could be made
TO the declarations of third persons.
Mr. Kerr demanded the yeas and nays and they were
ordered.
Mr. Adams said that he objected TO the interrogatory
he supposed he might give his reasons
The Chair decided that he could not.
Mr. Adams took an appeal, but after conversation
consented TO withdraw il.
MIR. Key offered TO Withdraw the interrogatorv
Mr. Burgess objected 10 its being withdrawn. He con-
sldered 1t tring question when ii offered and after
the House had been detained almost an hoar i'm decdin
it, then il withdrawn. He could not consent TO have
the House treated.
Mr.. Wayne said that as be understood the rule unless
some member adopted the ineogaory, the Counsel could
withdraw without leave ofany So unless the gem
eman adopted this triling nteogaory, it could still be
withdrawn.
Mr. Burgess said that he had objected because he could
not sanction such procedure. But he did not desire
TO throw any obstacle in the of proceeding, he
would withdraw his objection.
Mr. Key then withdrew the interrogatory
Mr.. Adams objected the ground TO another que
ry respecting conversation which passed Mr. Grundys
room; but the objection not sustained by the House.
The examination being closed, and the testimony hav
ing been read to the Witnesses
The further hearing of the postponed to IL
O'Clock tomorrow, and the House adjourned.
FROM THE JOURNAL THE HOUSED
Monday, Ap,it 3D.
The hour OF IL O'clock, meridian, having arrived
Samuel Houston, accompanied by his Counsel, was
Mr. ct.ttRs 521Gffftt I66eHi S9NYse, and
testified follows: $50
Question by The dccuSed-Did Mr. Stanbery tell Won
that the statement OF his remarks did not necessarily i'm
pute fraud to the accused
.1nSbCeT-Ile did not.
Question by Nh. Hdtccs.-Was or was not Govcrnor
Houston very mild and decorous i'm his EXPRESSION and
conduct at the time he first presented The letter TO Won and
uld you not lhnS that lie elt himself
by the reflection contained in the speech manner of its
publication before its time in debate and the note append
ed to the speech as it appeared in the ncwspapers
dnScer.l did not observe any passion or feeling in re-
aton to that matter the part of Gov Houston at any
time until my delivery him of Mr. Stanbery's letter
addressed to me- certainly thought he felt himself ag-
geved by the publication iii the newspaper but do not
remember he ever uttered IN my presence any thing from
which that impression drawn
Question by Mr.. PintOn.-When you delivered Mr.
Sanberys letter to Mr. H. did you inform him. Mr. Hous
ton, that by your construction Of the letter. he Mr. S.
Insisted upon his privilege as member of the House of
Representatives?
.dpscer-I informed Gov H. of the difficulties that
had in the first place, the construction of the letter
also informed him of the consultation had had with
member oil the House, in relation the constructions and
OF the construction which and my friend had come as to
the meaning OF the letter, which induced him. at the con-
clusion OF our conversation, TO thank for what had
done; and fIe said / had acted correctly.
Question by the CODmitee-When Mr. Houston
threatened TO whip MIR. :. before he left the House and
you remor rated against it, did the your rcmon-
STRANGE point TO the improperly of assauling him in the
House, or TO chat OF assailng him all for what had passed?
.AnsDer.-l think my remonstrance was placed upon
the ground OF the improperly of assaling him in the
House. and during the Session of Congress That was
the general scope OF my argument, and do not recoec
that it went farther.
Question by Mr.. Bates Of .lfass-In that conversa
ton was any thing said Of assaulng him elsewhere than
in the Housel
qnserI do not recollect that there was any conv sr
salon about aSsaulting him in any other place.
FELIX GRUMPY, Senator of the U. States from the
Stateoi tennessee was then sworn behalf of the
cused and testified as follows, viz:
Question by the dccused.--Was the accused at vouI
room shortly before you heard of the meeting between
the accused and MIR. Stanbery? When, and with whom
and Tor what purpose did he leave your room}
.qns,oer.As well as can Judge, about thirty minutes
before this occurrence took place, Governor Houston
was going along the passage into which the door o
my opens; the door was not entirely open or en-
tircy closed Mr.. Buckner, who was sitting in INV room
discovered that IL him. and asked him TO come in re-
marking that not on any secret matters
Governor ~ in and seated hi nsclc We conversed
on several different subjects Mr.. Blair who occupies an
adjoining room, and could easily distinguish the voice
any one spending in my room, being acquainted with Go
vernon H.. shortly after in likewise. The conver.
saOn assumed light, pleasant character and in which
Governor IL. told anecdotes which amused us 4
good deal In short time, Mr.. Buckncr and Mr.. BlaI
walked out Of the under the impression the,
had retired 10 their rooms, but discovered afterwards ha
they had not Gov. III. arose also asked him IN re-
main III said he must 90 home he had rested badI,
the night before knew Of him until five or si,
minutes afterwarda, Mr. Blair returned and told me ina
Coz ornor IL had beaten Mr. $. Mr.. Stanbery's nam,
was not mentioned by Governor ~. in my room. did
not think Of him. and do not know whether any other
son did.
Question by The accused-Do You or do YOU not know
tia the accused is badly wounded, and disabled i'm hi
right arm; and Is not that fact generally known 10 the per
sons acquainted with him?
I AnSUers--I have knowledge on that subject Cot
three years past; for Governor II has not lived near m,
Tor nearly tiot bme. know that since the year 1915
think my knowledge Of him then commenced in Tcnnes
seq he did labor under injury in his right arm
in consequence, ! believe, Of a wound received willis
he was in the army. do not know this myself but h
general impression was, that it disabled him Bsto lie be
ing generally known bV those acduaiuied vit tim, am