Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-12-29
,Ewcmty-aourth Congrcss--lst sess.
* HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
L.. l.ce..Lo.


in The District of Columbia; which lie moved TO refer to
Select Committee.
MIR. Hammond moved that petition be not received
The large majority by which the House had rejected
similar petition few days ago, had been very gratifying
to him. aud no doubt would be very gratifying to the
whole South. lie had hoped itwould satisfy gentlemen
charged with such petitions of the improperly of intro
ducng them here Since, however, il had had that
effect and they persisted still in urging them upon the
House and upon the country, he thought it
curing much Of the House, TO ask to put
decided seal ofreprobaton them, by peemporily
jecting this.
The Speaker said he not aware that such motion
had been sustained by the former practice of the
House, and in addition TO that by standing rule of tho
House, (he 45th) petitions and memorials could be
debated decided the day of their prese but
otherwise.
Mr. Garland of Virginia, then moved lay the petit
ton on the table
Mr. Hammond said, as he was aware of no rule of the
House restricting he rejection of petitions he would
modify his motion accordingly, by moving that the
The Speaker remarked that the motion of Mr. Garland
would take precedence.
Mr.. Hammond begged the gentleman from Virginia
(Nr. Garland to withdraw his motion lay the
ble that might have direct upon this matter.
He disposed go discussion of the aues-
ton involved in the petitions though should il be urged
he would not shrink from it hairs breadth but he did
think it due to the House and the country, give at
the most decisive evidence of the sentiments
tanned here upon this subject He wished to put end
to these petitions He could sit there and submit
their being brought forward until the House had become
caous to their consequences He could not sill there
and see the rights of the Southern People assaulted day
after day. by the ignorant fanatics from whom these
MORALS proceed.
The Speaker requested the gentleman to suspend his
remarks until he read the 18th rule of the House. which
follows: Petitions, memorials, and other papers,
addressed 10 the House shall be presented by the Spea
kerr or by member in his place brief statement of the
contents thereof shall verbally be made by the nfro
Ger, and shall not be debated decided the day of
their being first read mnles: the House shall d-
otherwise, but shall lie the table, be taken up
in the order they read Unless, therefore, the
House should direct otherwise the Chair would be
PEELED under the rule to arrest any discussion and d.
rect The petition to lie over till tomorrow besides the
debatsble.
Mr. Hammond's object, he said was to debate the
merits of the question, but TO move, if in
do so, the rejection of the petition.
The Speaker replied that the rule imperative
himself debate or decision on the petition un
less the House directed otherwise, and must lie over
day
Mr. Mercer remarked that the motion TO reject brought
the whole merits of the question: and would
riy bring the very debate the gentleman said he de-
sired toavod and he maintained that the lie
| on the table was in order.
Mr.. Garland of Va said he felt compelled 10 insist
upon his motion to lay the petition the table for the
present.
Mr.. Williams of N c., said that he did not like TO
take appeal from the decision of the Chair but
OF some Importance that the rights ofmembers should be
clearly ascertaned lie that il perfectly
in order for any gentleman TO make the point whether
not paper should be received, and to its re-
lection.
The Speaker said, the question was new to him. he
had doubts os moment; he entertained the motion
OF the gentleman from S. Carolina (AIr Hammond but
took precedence
MIR. Williams contended that the latter motion would
apply only after the petition had been received and was
in possession of the House.
Mr. Hawes rose to question of order. Unless the
gentleman took appeal from the decision of the Chair
he was out of order in addressing the House.
MIR. Williams intended to appeal He in favor of
petition should be laid upon the table, but he could not
consent that that motion should ride that was
prior to it, He begged TO refer the Hon Speaker to an
example set by of his predecessors 1t that
memorial sent to that House few years ago from
representative of some of the South American re-
evolutionary governments. That representative of this
South American government took upon himself TO an
peal from the decision of the President of the United
States to the naon through the House of Representa-
lives, and his memorial presented by the presiding
officer of that House question raised BY dis
tinguished member from Pennsylvania, and motion
was made that the petition should not be received and
the House decided that il should not be received Now
that was altogether preliminary 60 the question of laying
on the table, and had precedence of it, motion to lay
on the table could only be maintained when The subject
before the House; and after the question: whether il
should be received or not, whether it should be laid
before the House, had been decided. 1t with
of ascertainDg that question: that Mr. w. appealed from
the decision of the Chair for lie in favor of the mo-
ton OF the gentleman from Virginia, to lay the petition
the table, but he also in "a of first receiving it,
MIR. Mercer well remembered he said the case cited
by the gentleman from North Carolina and 81 he was
not mistaken, the question that occasion in
relation to the constitutional power of House to re-
fuse to receive petitions from citizens of the United
States, for the right 10 petition reserved c
by the Constitution, but it as 10 whether an in.
dvidual not citizen Of the United States could come
lbeTe peltlOn inc petitioner In that being
commander in Of the South American Governments
The Speaker stated the question before the House. ms
it then Stood and said he should be glad to have The
judgment of the House upon it, After reading the 18th
rule, and also the 32d rule laying down the order of p
veged motoas, OF which that 10 lie the table stands
second, lac remarked that the Chair considered the pe-
ton having been received by The House. and had en-
terained the motions for time but under the former
rule, the petition ought TO lie IT, however, the
House set that aside, still the motion 10 lie on the table
having the preference the question could debated
IFS merits If in error, the Chair would be very hap
py 10 be corrected The question then before the House
was-Slin the decision Of the Chair be sustained
Mr.. Bell, of Tennessee, thought il would be better
that the petition lie for day. without being de-
baied at that time. AS the question was a new one or
about TO be decided for the first time would be safest
for the House at least TO let the petition lie day
aud he would therefore suggest 10 the gentleman from
South Carolina, that this had better be adopted
and at the next day OF meeting tive House could then
either reject 1t or lay il on the table Mr. h. thought the
decision Of The Chair, that the petition should lie over
10 substance right and he thought certainly the safest
course 10 pursue.
Mr. Gascock said nc should have supported the views
Of the last gentleman IL different course had not been
taken the other day lie could no reason why the
pursued in relation TO the petition presented by
honorable neniber from Maine, MIR FairfcldJ should
be departed from now why, after the decisive
that went forth to the country, expressive Of the
and feelings Of SO large and respectable majority on
that occasion, they should now assume different
shape Had tie question itself undergone any change?
II what then done wr0nn, let them say
50, and let those who were unaoquainted with the
rules Of proceeding, know they we're in error but
he nothing in The rules that conficied with the