Daily Richmond times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1849-1850, 1850-03-30

this morning OF the debates that occurred Yesterday
and necessarily had to write out what did write
hastily as possible to let it take its proper place in the
paper, do not vouch for the exact language of the
whole. Iconfess, l am willing to acknowledge, there
was one omission, and one which may be considered
by some gentlemen important omission: but 7 have
good authority for that omission In the course of the
| ra pid discussion in which | was proceeding in the
course OF very fervid speech happened to aude to
an affair OF honor, now adjusted between the Senator
from Missouri and friend OF mine on this floor | al
uded to it in terms OF great harsness certainly; but it
is no great matter OF surprise it, after having been assa
ed IN language OF scury that used language Of great
harshness. Well, sir, the honorable Senator from la
bama who sits near me, (Mr King,) suggested that
had ndiscreety alluded to that affair." Perhaps might
say the gentleman who was referred to in the case en-
ertaned the same opinion, and expressed it here me-
that was unfortunate that had referred to that affair
| What did say! | said at to my friend will
admit that it was indelicate and will omit it in the
published speech. And did omit it. Now, that was
perhaps the harshes thing that said with perhaps one
exception which will not now refer to. give my rea-
son for emitting what did, believe the reason to be
good one but, fit desired, it shall appear in print as
reported by the reporter, with such efforts on my own
part to supply actual omissions in the notes as am
capable of making. Ii it will avail the Senator any
| thing, he shall have it.
Now, sill, undertake to assert that the report which
the Senator from Missouri acknowledges Substantially
correct in the Republic, substantially harmonious
with the report which appears in the Union and Inte
gencer, with this difference chiefly, land regard that
as the only difference in taet that the reporter for the
Republic necessarily condenses all debates and so
condenses that long speech OF four five columns in
the lnteigencer is found sometimes in the Republic in
hall column, or sing column. Such is the case in
THIS instance. spoke, as Senators we'll know long
enough to have occupied two three columns in either
the lntelgencer or the Union, and yet what said and
what was said In reply to me, when published in the Re-
pubic, IS found not to overspread more than column
and quarter will say. then, that the report in the
Republic substantially accurate, except in the respect
alluded to- that the report condensed necessarily so
that the remarks made found in very narrow com
pass, and much that said is left out, which endea-
vored to supply in the lntelligencer and Union The
gentleman says he will take the notes of the two report-
ers-he notes OF the reporters of the IntelIgencer and
those OF the reporters OF the Union The nlegencer,
IN this relied upon the notes taken by the reporters
OF the unlon For that reason, the reports in these
two papers will be found to be precisely similar This
Is very often found to be the case The customary ex-
change OF printed slips takes place between them in
consequence OF which we very often find the re-
port precisely IN each OF these papers, of any partcu
| lar speech
But sir the language especially objected to is that
contained IN the concluding sentence. Whether spoke
OF age or not, not prepared to say positively
that was lett blank in the notes brought me- filed
| ltup according to my memory OF what occurred.
will not undertake to say that used the word "age" in
| my remarks yesterday. will not undertake TO say
that the very words reported the very words used
but every Senator will remember that distinctly alu-
ded to the tact that the Senator from Missouri I'M
derstood holding himself responsible to the laws
OF honor and did say most emphatically and it is SO
reported That the door was opened by him. il he would
say that ne held himself responsible the laws of hon
or would take the proper steps to bring him to just
punishment lsaid all this in the hearing fthe Senate!
was 1t not so understood by the Senate? VAST not
substantially the same? Where is the difference?
VIII not undertake to say that used the word "age-
did not certainly ought to have done So because
that is to some extent circumstance which does weigh
| with gentlemen in affairs OF this kind.
The honorable Senator says that when the notes were
brought to him he refused to read Them Well sir that
is his example. am not bound to follow it. do not
care whether ne chose to read them not | chose to
read them shall never refuse to read what is brought
TO me. shall always choose to look at the reporters
notes ana to correct them wherever think there
faults or omissions. But the gentleman says he would
not look at them, nor correct them Tor fear OF being
| suspected OF injustice That motive does not affect
| me. do what think right without caring who sus-
poets my motives or without thinking OF the motives of
others. That another difference between the Sena-
tor and myself Sin, every one who hears will say
that the speech which delivered yesterday was as harsh
as the speech which reported. There is not Sc
rous charge reported either in the Integencer or the
Union that was not uttered yesterday; and if there
any thing in that speech that could give offence as re-
ported that am supposed by any not having ut
| tered, all have to say is that utter it now.
And now, sir, will not handy epthets with any man,
but after this, think my duty say what said yes
terday, and what am reported as having said am
done with the affair here did not report that That
was the report OF reporter himself said yester
day, and say so again. expressed my opinions; l
ayowed my sentiments as really entertained declared
my principles OF action; satisfied with the alter
cation as it proceeded was satisfied with the result of
1t, so Tar as man can be satisfied with mere para-
y In the presence OF the Senate yesterday, that far
as the Senate was concerned, was done with the af-
| lar; should prosecute it no further here.
| Now, do not care what the Senator SAYS Why
SIR his voice OF Pronunciation passes by as the idle
winds. Months ago expressed my opinion of his
| course len years ago. as he knows, expressed my
opinion OF him. have reason to know, and | can
prove that ne was greatly offended with what then
SAID have had occasion very often to speak of that
Senator publicly. did so in published letter last
summer over my own signature have done so here,
n m anti untarc i, II
yesterday say and repeat again, as much of harsh
and dsrespecttul language as am reported in the In
tellgencer and Union to have uttered. What could
do more? should dishonor the Senate, should dis
credit myself, ii were now after what has occurred to
repeat the language which used yesterday in the pre-
senee Of the Senate | avow the speech printed. |
aVow every word that am reported to have said and
care not whether that Senator considers it falsely re-
ported or not. His opinion is with matter OF alb
solue indifference.
There is single point on which have little curosi-
ty land that is, to see how this thing will be reported in
didsay yesterday that the Senator was uderstood
to dsavow the laws honor. have seen it printed
by ofhis colleagues in the other House within the
last week. have seen the same fact printed repeated
y; and have had especial to suppose it to be
true common impression to that effect has certain
y existed. wish to know this morning whether am
authorized to understand-tor the language of the
Senator Is somewhat eQuvoca; his denial that he had
made the avowal seemed to be modified-that the
Senator does consider himself responsible TO the laws
| "
what to take 1t is not sufficient for him to say
that he has never said so and So Let him say that he
does hold himself responsible to the laws OF honor and
give him an opportunity to prove it,
Il is due to the Reporters for this paper to state that
the honorable Senator has here been led into error of
which ne IS doubtless unconscious Our reporters pre-
pared full report of the debate alluded to- and handed
It into the office at an early hour Tuesday evening.
It was not submitted to the examination of either of
the honorable Senators who took part that discus
hnoauSn 6allcapU ultasicn c,,b
leot so muqh tob regretted At subsequent period of
the night the Foreman received message from the
office OF the Union, stating that Mr.. Foote (as is
usual with that genteman) revising his remarks,
and desired that the version ofthem should appear
in the Ifhellgencer This being privilege which is al
ways accorded to Senators when they will undergo the
labor which its exercise necessarily imposes the Fore
man, supposing the matter to be substantially the same
did hesitate to comply with the request made in the
name of Mr.. Foote, and substituted the printed copy
sent from the Union" for the manuscript of the Repor
ters which bad been nrevinasu Tic possorsiel