The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-12-13

men have drawn from it Il discoses no pledge-t does
not intimate that my colleague has indicated political
sentiments TO the freesollers, which his friends from the
South did not know, have reason 10 suppose he held
Gentlemen say they voted for him expecting he was
opposed TO the Wilmot Provso Well is there anything
word OF it. He says it is true, that he is opposed to
me extension OF slavery and who, in free State is not
There are non interference there. 10 be suremen
VINO desire 10 Keep his question out OF Congress- and
have always understood my colleague TO be one of them
his district and mine join each Others and throughout his
canvass, understood be took the non .inierierence
ground-was against the Wilmot Provso, but still was
against the extension OF slayery also.
Gentlemen in the South, even distinguished senators
and Others have expressed themselves against the fur
ther extension OF slavery yet they opposed TO any
action OF Congress, as understand my colleague is
prevent IT. So much then, for the allegation 10 his
Rrovisosm.
sentence is from his letter to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, (Mr. WMMoT,l which, isolated and I'm.
connected with anything ese,gves color to the idea
that he has given strong pledge the free soiers; but
taken and explained in connexion with the previous YER
bal communications which passed between them on the
same subject and to which il directly referred, and what
Is Il! What does il amount to- My colleague says in
in his letter, he committees shall Be organized in such
manner as to be satisfactory to you and your friends"
Well, now let us refer 10 the conversations which had
would be satisfactory He [Mr. WmMorl says Il don't
ask TO be placed in any particular position on any
t,cular commtte; nor do my friends All we ask is,
question: all sections shall be fairly represented We
want the voice Of no section or party sied or smother
ed BY packing the committees" Mr.. BRowN answers,
Certainly, all have q right to- be heard" Now,
suppose committee was consdtuted-a majority
Tor instance, OF noninterference men, il you please
snd then minority of Proviso men, mixed up
with an extreme southern address man or two, and
one-idea ree.soiler from the North would not such
committee be one which would represent all par
hes or you might change its order and arrangement
but still combine the same elements Now, this is all
that my colleague is pledged to in this letter. pledge II
be- And IS there gentleman here who will say that
spsh general and as il seems to me, universally accept
But It seems that this thing Of writing letters when
candidate IS anomalous, noyel-nay, dishonorabe.
to say that no honorable man would ask pledges Of
candidate, nor give them Now, the gentleman must
differ in his notions of honorable conduct IRON many of
his southern friends for have understood that several
letters have been written by southern gentlemen north
ern men, whose names were being used in connexion
with the Speakershp propoundng certain nterogaories
IN reference TO the slave question: and distinctly making
a satisfactory answer to thema siae qua to their
votes This has been done repeatedly since we attempted
10 organize this House.
This is quite new idea to me- that is improper for
man when candidate to answer questions Ii may be
impoc but certainly not dshonofabe and though this
Is the rst ever heard OF this letter. and though think
must insist and repeat nothing i'm IT, taken in connex
ion with the previous conversation to which it alluded
and TO which both he and the gentleman from Pennsyl
yania Mr. WHMoT] testify 10, that usfes tue imputa
ton Of duPlIGIty, deceit or dshonor.
Mr.. WOODWARD was understood to remark that he
objected to the course OF the gentleman from Indiana
views to HIMSELF but on the ground that he had given
pledges to certain gentlemen OF which he kept those not
agreeing with those parties in ignorance
Mr.. HUBBARD stated that he too had addressed let
ter to the gentleman from Indiana TO which he had
ceved no reply He only desired that the member for
whom he voted should be in favor of non-intercrence
upon the subject OF slavery and he preferred TO vote for
northern man who could be depended on to do justice
to his own section OF the Union, from the South
desired n the Speaker man s, Who 10 the discharge
protector OF the whole Union. Mr. H. was further un
terstood to say that he had had interview with the
member from Indiana in which the subject of the organ
lzaton OF the committees having been introduced he
Mr. H. had declared that he wanted to know nothing
in advance upon that score, he did not conceive il
proper either to require or to give pledges on such sub
Mr.. F. p. STANTON regretted, as much as any gen.
eman could that this discussion had arisen but he did
not regret that this transaction had come 10 light He
felt as one OF the southern gentlemen who had support
ed the member from Indiana that portion of the odum
Tell upon himself as on all from the South who had
voted for that gentleman He wanted TO make the single
explanation that he had supposed from his knowledge oil
The former course OF the member from Indiana that he
Mr. Bnows] was opposed TO the Wlmot Proviso. Be.
ing under this impression, and not believing that he
would enter into collision with the free soers he voted
Tor that gentleman TO the bitter end he acknowledged
hat end to have been He owed thanks to those who
had resisted his Mr. b. 81 election and glad of the
occurring opportunity OF acknowledging his obligation to
Mr. McMULLEN remarked that, though never before
attempting to say word in delberatve assembly, he
elt II to be his duty TO say something this subject
He had heard ndistinct rumors that the views Of the
gentleman iron Indiana, upon slavery questions, were
lot such as would Justify him voting in his favor; and
he had been anxious TO obtain satisfactory information
On this score gentleman from Maryland had informed
lin that the member from Indiana had given assurances
o the South. % hearing this, he MIR. Mem was un.
ersood to say that he promptly answered that he had
,ny TO be satisfied OF the fact him TO vote in his
ayor; he bad expected the gentleman from MARYLAND /
o call again upon him, though he had not done So In
eed TINS morning, not then even feeling satisfied be had
himself called on the gentleman from Indiana, and frank
stated TO him that il was charged by that he
lad been asked to give pledges TO the free soers to the
fleet that they should be taken care Of on the committees
m which they particularly desired 10 be placed
Mr.. Mem was understood TO say, further, that the
eneman from Indiana had replied that he had answered
he free olers, that il elected he would place gentle.
nen on committees only according 10 what he believed
be Their proper individual standing and capabilities
With this reply, he (Mr. McM) had been well pleased
lie had further remarked that he had given no pledge 10
nese gentlemen IN answer to another question from Mr.
dcM. In conclusion, MIR. Mem said that on the next
ote ne would show the House and country where he
esred TO stand upon this question OF choosing Speaker
Mr. BROWN, OF Indiana, here made few remarks /,
'hich were naudible amid the great confusion sur.
ounding the reporters desk. !
Mr. JACOB THOMPSON said that, though feeling
eepy mortified by what had occurred, he was glad thai
he development had been made As he did not believe
la the House was at that time prepared TO 60 with
Re voting, he would move that they do adj urn r
AT The request OF Mr. DUsHAM, who promised to re.
ew II, Mr.. Il. withdrew the motion; when -
Mr.. DUNHAM said: Mr. Clerk had not expected to r
jingle IN this discussion. If discussion it may be called
DO not wish to add TO this excitement which consider
altogether uncaed for but cannot sit by and hear
I'M aboltionsm and free sosm cannot also hear II
sacton denounced ma dishonorable and fo,hear