The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-05-16
TUESDAY, MAY II, 1880.
HOUSE OF REPREsENrATIvEs.
After Inc reading OF the journal,


propriety Of reporting BILL; which having been
The SPEAKER announced the frst business in order
10 be the question on the motion Of Mr. FEATHERsroE
to 20 into Committee Of the Whole on the state OF the
Union, made yesterday This question being put, i was
MI STANIY moved the usual resolution to terminate
the debate on the Presidents California message 10 Com
mittee Of the Whole on the state OF the Union on the
22d instant
to alter IT, so to have it call for the termination OF the
debate on the LIST Tuesday in June next; which modif
cation having been accepted,
resolution be laid on the table which motion he called
the yeas and nays; which, being ordered, y was mol
agreed io-, ,, q, nays y, Si -, y, !.
make statement bearing this resolution. He desired
to know what special orders interviewed -
Mr.. WENTWORTH rose to y privileged question but
The SPEAKER explained that there were two special
orders intervening between this date and that on which
the resolution proposed to terminate the debate.
MI. JACOB rho PSON remarked that he was under
the impression that heretofore no resolution to close
debate had been adopted when there intervening
questions. To do in this case would put II IN the
power OF the majority to occupy all the intervening time
in the consideration OF other SUBJECTS thus gaggng the
Mr. WENTWORTH. rising to privileged question,
held that the Speakers explanation well as the re-
mark Of the gentleman from Mississippi, [Mr. THoMp-
MIR. INGE said that there was evidently disposition
to force through the resolution in thin House. He
would therefore move call OF the House; and on that
motion be demanded the yeas and nays; which being
Mr. WILLIAMS suggested that as many members de-
sired yet 10 speak upon the California question, the
mover of the resolution MIR STANLY1 would probably
cheerfuy change his proposition for their accommoda-
ton to designate more distant day for the term
nation Of the debate. =.
Mr. INGE remarked that he cared not what modifca-
ton might be made in the resolution II the gag was to
be applied be would rather have done as early as posi-
BILE.
L.. AZ. o11.l. 49, far Ilof
the House, it was not agreed to-yeas "a, nays 81.
Mr. STANLY here so modified the resolution as TO call
for the closing OF the debate al l. p m, OF the second
Tuesday In june $50
After some conversation between the SPEAKER, Mr..
INGE, MIR. THOMPSON OF Mississippi, and MIR.
JONES, the effect OF the resolution, adopted, the
Mr. MORSE moved that the resolution be laid on the
On which motion. MIR, INGE called for The yeas and
nays which having been ordeed It was not agreed To-
MI. WALLACE moved an adjournment; on which
motion the yeas and nays were demanded.
Mr. McMULLEN asked him TO withdraw the motion
10 adjourn; which being done,
Mr.. Mem moved TO amend the resolution by striking
out the second Tuesday and inserting the fourth Tues.
day in June. Mr.. Mem trusted that the mover Mr..
STAkLYl would accept that amendment.
The question being on the amendment,
Mr.. CHESTER BUTLER moved to postpone the
further consideration of the resolution until the first
Monday in June; on which motion the yeas and nays
having been asked and ordered il was not agreed TO-
yeas IS, nays So .r
The question then required on the amendment OF the
gentlemen from Virginia. mir. McMuLLEE,] TO strike
out the second Tuesday and insert the fourth Tuesday
u Mr. M Meet moved the previou. question
The main question being ordered the question required
on the amendment proposed by the gentleman from VIZ
ginia, IMr. McMuLLEs; j and on this
Mr.. VENABLE called for the yeas and nays; which
were ordered, and ii was not agreed to-yeas So,
nays OF.
And then the resolution offered by the gentleman from
North Carolina IMr. SrAsLYl was agreed TO-
motion TO reconsider that vote, and then TO lay that
motion on the liable, was made and the said last mo-
lion agreed 10. t.ts.
Mr.. WALLACE asked the unanimous consent OF the
House for permission to offer resolution; but
Objection being made, leave was not granted.
On motion OF Mr. BAYLY. the House then went into
Committee OF the Whole on the state of The Union, Mr.
BorD IN the char and taking up the Presidents Caof
7 Mr.. MEAcHAM, who was entitled to the floor, went
on to discuss the compromise bill OF Mr.. McCLERsAsD.
The other side were endeavorng to make political capital
out OF the California question. The charge that the
friends oil Taylor had labored 10 present their presden
ual candidate on different platform in different sections
Of the country though true, was than bad been
done by both parties in every presidential canvass occur
ring since 1884. There other political movements
IN this connexIon the tapis Thus the cry OF ede-
raj federal federal has been echoed here. For five
months the House had been engaged in sectional and
political squabbe, which di.graced all concerned in it,
The spectacle presented by the people Of California Just
now was sublime. as Mr.. M. proceeded TO show. They
were relying upon Congress, whose duty IL 10 act on
their case Here Mr. M took up seiafim, the objections
against the admission OF California and replied TO them
She not to be kept out by OF FORM being far
ON the safe side OF precedent fifteen States OF the
Union The foreign in adopting her constitution
was not sufficient to vate her right being by no means
as great in proportion TO the whole number cast as the
cases Of Illinois or Michigan He objected 10 coupling
the admission OF California with any other question
His vote that question should not be made TO DEPEND
on his views upon any other subject The North, too,
had questions OF vital importance 10 her. which could as
rghtfuy be introduced into this bill for instance that
OF an increase OF protection and general hafbor and
river bill. To link them all TO California, or even the
portion the South ask to have so Connected would be TO
He objected to Mr. McCLKRSAsDs bill Also especially
because proposed 10 shrk the ordinance OF 1857 Yer
mont had early taken ground in favor OF the Proviso
where she stood now. She denied that citizens OF one
State could carry their local laws to California Suppose
nifty vermonters insisted on carrying one q their State
laugh at the proposition as Illegal STAKEHOLDER hav
ing his horse and his negro. on following them into
Canada could recover the first, but not the ashe for
mer being property under the common law: not no the
latter. .4s r 10
Vermont had for thirty years opposed the admission Of
more slave States but being out voted, she bad submit
ted, and, in insisting the admission Of California and
New Mexico az free States, now but carrying out
her time honored principles Now she would consent
10 neither action nor non acion not absolutely prohibit
ing slavery ~ the Ierriorles Describing the history OF
the origin Of the bill OF Mr.. MccLrRNASp, he spesker
said that seemed to be ordained that for generations
When first moo,ed, the annexation al TEXAS WA a..
ounced BY tbe democracy Of the North, but they had
wheeled round 70 cover The position OF their Ar leaders
a. taken for them by their fe-leadsrs SubSsousniIv
Texas was annexed by nearly clean party vote Of Con-