The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-02-02


out of ORDER but the Chair cannot decide as to what mat
tiers the gentleman from South Carolina might deem per-
sonal to himself The gentleman from Indiana refers 10
no particular words OF the gentleman from South Caro-
lima out OF order.
Further conversation ensued, which resulted in
modification OF the point in writing, and an appeal from
the decision of the Chair, which,
On motion by Mr.. STEPHENS, OF Georgia, was laid
on the table by report OF teers-atnatve 90, negative
SO Mr. RHETT proceeded with his explanation, and
said:
The last matter he would notice not personal as
regards his argument upersona regards his conduct
TIE gentleman had quoted from speech delivered by
him (Mr. r. in the South Carolina convention which
repealed the ordinance of notification, in which he sand
that under the government as admnsered have no
ardent attachment to the union OF these States"
The gentleman infers that one who mus speaks ought
not to talk OF the disregard OF the constitution by others
Sir (sad Mr. RI we in South Carolina as conseen
ously believed at that day that we were UNFOLDING the
constitution of the United States as those opposed 10 US
Indeed after the proclamation OF President Jackson we
considered ourselves alone carrying the ark OF the
constitution; and do not doubt il the gentleman from
Virginia had been in similar situation he would have
used language at least strong as that which he cor
recty says used towards the Union As he has spoken
of the Immortal resolutions of 1885," must presume
he would have been with the republicans OF Virginia IN
the eventu struggle by that great State against the
alien and sediton laws. Mr.. GoGGIN nterposed and
said that he misrepresened in the paper, and had
spoken of the resolutions OF 9S IN his speech Wel
sir it will be shame TO him to suppose that he would
have been with his native State IN her resistance then TO
that first great aggression the constitution and the
rights of the States Suppose, after Virginia had passed
her multiplying these laws, the government of the Uni
ted States had sent rigates and soops-o-war up the
James river to Richmond and had quartered the out
skirts of that city portion of army under the COM
mand of the general n-chef, with the avowed purpose
of reducing Virginia to submission by force OF arms;-
would the gentleman from Virginia have been very much
enamored pith the government as ddmin,steredP and
would he have then been willing to make the profession
of being "ardently attached to the Union OF these
S,ates!" do not ask him democrat, who solemny
believed these laws to be enforced to be unconstltu-
tional-but ask him, as Virglnan, could he have
suppressed feelings of Indignation and alienation 'would
he if he could, have suppressed them against gov
eminent and Union which had thus added threats and in
suits to its oppressions' Sir, such our position in
South Carolina, when your ships Of war were in the
bay OF Charleston and portion OF your army on Suli-
vans island But, although the gentleman would have
said as did. SHAT under the government as admins
tered have ardent attachment to the Union of these
States !" doubt whether he-l doubt whether any re-
publican in Virginia. in 1898, under such circumstances
would have said what added in this speech overlooked
tany the gentleman would not have said more, if he
desired to have his professions believed and think, it
would have been far more graceful II he had not COM
PEELED to produce II as sequence to his quotation
But Mr.. President let me be misunderstood When
speak of the Union, speak Of it as now isnot as 1t
speak of the Union with its abuses-not as it
the the constitution, and the great
PRINCIPLES of liberty was intended by rihers TO per
States, and the Union intended toeeas wW yield to
derotion and attachment I, has been Tor such
Union that have struggled for years and the hope OF
reforming from what it IS alone has rendered
ton tolerable under its expressions"
PRESIDENTS MESSAGE.
Mr. HOWELL COBB opened his argument by refer
ring to the AsHMpN declaration, that "the war
necessarily and unconshtnGnay begun by the President
of the United States" The language here employed Che
said) imports that the war was unnecessary that it could
have been easily avoided by the exercise of proper wis
dom, discretion, and foresight the part of the Pres
dent In order to sustain this charge, and TO make the
President responsible before the country for all the blood
and franei cd hIS pnInrf hna hanr
made prove that fhe immediate of the was
the Presidents order for the removal Of The troops from
Corpus Christi to the region OF the Rio Grande. This
the and substance OF the Presidents offending
Ii might not be amiss while we looking al the origin
of the and seeking to find out individual whom
TO cast lis responsibility to inquire what was the state of
with reference to this matter, Of the time of the proceed
ngs which resulted in the annexaon Of Texas might
then regarded by the opposes of thai good
OF war and good ground OF objection to the intro
ducton of Texas into this Union. He would not take
this labor upon himself to remind those who here
during the discussion. and familiar with the positions
then taken by the public men and the press OF the oppo
site party with reference to the results which would
posed; but seemed really necessary that the memory of
gentlemen should be refreshed They seemed 10 have
utterly forgotten that they then ceased not continually 10
remind the country that the act of annexation would lead
to with Mexico necessary resultant this act
alone would give to Mexico such cause of offence as
would necessarily involve the country in state OF
away
of gentlemen tor if they honest and sincere in the
declarations which they then FORTH he could not see
how the responsibility OF this war could DO wiped out
from the conscences and be thus passed by and forgot
ten by the members of the opposition, and be charged
wholly upon the conscience OF the President Cen
tenen went far to declare, then, that
ton was, ibso jdctO, war and Mr. c. read from their
published declarations for the purpose of comparing
them with the recently recorded declaration of the
majority, charging the origin of the war upon the
President They declared then, that the annexation of
Texas was per Sc and If annexation was war
If war thus commenced, he asked how it could
be held ttat this unnecessarily and
shtutonay begun by the President OF the United States
For this illustration he read from the speech against
r. NGERsoLI,l and from the speech on the ques
ton by the gentleman from Vermont, Mr. CoLLAMER,]
who reiterated with some force the sentiments of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania, and added sentence,
which was all Mr.. &, desired now to read 1t was this:
Annexation itself Che said is war with Mexico; it is
not matter for which Mexico may declare war; but will
not" Such the declaration OF that gentleman pend
ing the discussion of the resolutions OF annexation
Here them the plain position and unequvoca dec
laration that war was to begin by annexation
Mr., VlN1ON desired to ask the gentleman from Geor-
ga whether the friends of annexation that time ad
mitted that this was act of war
Mr.. COBB No, sir; and we stand on the same ground
now that we then occupied.
Mr.. COLLAMER Did not the President say after
wards, that the country was in a state of peace.
Mr.. COBB admitted the fact, and supposed that we
must take II that the mind of the gentleman from Yer
mont was convinced by the argument of the President
that annexation was not of war.
Mr. G. would not trouble the House with reading other
extracts from these speeches made the 29h Congress-
which went TO show conclusvey that the whc party as
position wholly irreconcieable with that
tha,.,, al thn, i 4 A. a.