The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1837-08-30


laying such a Resolution on the table. in
stead of meeting it n, once would be shrink
ing from responsibility and duty, and tha
he therefore felt compelled to have som,
definite action of the House thereon.
The subject it will be recolec,ed frs
began to have formidable bearing upor
the introduction of resolutions by Mr.
Pinckney, on sth February 1886, in orde,
To effect which, the rule of the House wa.
dispensed with, and both Pearce and
sprague voted for so dispensing with the
rule' and unquestionably with view
to get the subject before the house. in
some parliamentary and tangible form =
IN winch they were certainly right and
on the same day he had distinctly and un-
e.qu'vocaly by his vote expressed his sem
uments on the proposition alluded to. to-
gether with w. Sprague--ns may be seen
by reference to The journal of the House,
page 3ll and 3l3
But it is said that on the question taken
the next day, May 9th, Mr.. Pearce dodg-
ed, and did not vote with the friends oc Alb
clifton. 1t ought, in Justice to Mr.. Pearce.
10 De recoiiected, that he was at that time
member of standing committee, and of
TWO or three select committees. and that
such was the pressure of business on their
hands that, by an order of the Honse, they
were permitted TO sit for the transaction of
business during the sitting hours of the
House and we all know that frequently
10 ne The case even in our own Assembly.
But suppose it were otherwise, you will
md upon an examination of the same Jour
nal, more frequent absences of Mr. Sprague,
without any such excuse, than you can of
Mr. fearce, with the excuse: it, however,
IL is matter OF reproach to either of those
gentlemen, that they happened to be out
OF their seats when some particular vote
was taken, what sort of excuse can the
ffeemen of this state devise or invent for
those others, both Senators and Repre-
sentatlyes, who, during full half the time
OF session of Congress, have never been
IN their seats at all |? What can we. here.
at home, say to our own Representatives
In the General Assembly y,-Rdg ggles, Sayer,
wood, and others,-who very rarely ap-
pear when the Assembly sits in this town.
and still more rarely, if ever, when sitting
IN any other place.
1t is also insisted against Mr.. Pearcc rs !
matter of reproach, that he voted against
Mr.. Phillips motion to lay Mr.. Pinkney's
I'D Resolution on the table but instead of
oeing matter of reproach, to my mind, it fur
nished evidence of promptness, preparation
and consistency; with hundreds of Aboli-
uon petitions before congress and the num-
Der increasing every successive week, i,
would not do, to put the petitioners off. and
postpone and defer from time to time the
moment when congress, in Justice ms well to
themselves AS to the petitioner, must decide
one way or the other, and surely all those
who were then ready to vote against the
Resolution itself, had, and could have, no
reason to vote in favor of laying it on the
table-why not decide the one way or the
other and let the petitioners at least UNDER
stand what was 10 be their fate so that we
should rather condemn those who would
have procrastlnated than those who were +,
willing to meet the exigency When a ,
measure is before Congress that from its 6
own intrinsic force and importance, or diff .
cnity II you please, is an absorbing one, I
measure that is in fact convuIsing 3-4 parts I
OF the country, and as we are threatnincly y
told will destroy the UGion of the States b
# we should only attempt to 'pm it asleep r
tor the session." as this writer expresses Ii
should indeed be inconsistent !,
mot to say treacherous base deserters Q
from our posts and untitled for such stations. / 7
No such reproach however can be laid at I,
he door of Mr. Pearce. He foresaw the IA
'quaH, and was prepared to meet it; and his n
whole course during the last and former /;
sessions of Congress are in entire and COM r.
,lete accordance with the sentiments .opin- ,;
mr.
o MIR. w. ;. Chase. The motion to Law n,
IN the table however was lost, and what ii
oursc did he then take-why he was ready B,
nd deslrous to record his vote against it n,
md did so. -
But 1t seems that or Doth Dec. 1886. al
lr. Pearce voted for laying the petition of 70
ne inhabitants of Silver-Spring on the ta- OF
lie, and that Mr.. Sprague did not vote on sy
ma. occasion oh. no-and | suppose, 81
his writer would have it, that he dodged liz
1hen he might have been necessarily out of W
is seat only for a few minutes aud so il is b
Ons man may rob an orchard when an sa
"a, ther cannot safely look over the gate. ~ to
nose VINO have any familiarity with egis- "a
tive proceedings, know that vote one isl
'ay or the other, on such motion, furnish m
no criterion of whatmay be persons vote bs
taxing the final question on the Bill act. m
resolution itself,-for a thousand cir CIV
having nothing to do with the on
isri's OF the thing, may have temporary be
and render delay expedient and er,
ecessary' such we may suppose TO have wi
cen the case in the present instance and ra,
specially, as on the 9th January following ca
e ind Mr.. Pearce and Mr.. Sprague both wi
'ting for the reception of a similar petition ins
ON the women of South Weymouth. up
lass,-and also on the same day. and Su
me petition, himself and Mr.. Sprapue. an
lth voting AGAINST the mniinn nf AZ co,