New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-08-07
much LONGER will they tolerate such a state Of
seuater Phelps on the 0mnibus.

WASHINGTON, Saturday, August ,.
" hs Editer Of The nibunss
notice in your paper Il think of Thursday last
that your correspondent, in sdverting TO the pro-
ceedngs In the Senate on Tuesday, expresses
some surprise at my votes. As your paper circu'
ates extensively among my constituency, 1t is per
hans important TO correct the error into which be
seems TO have fallen.
BE represents me as voting again" Mr..
Walkers proposition to lay the Omnibus BILL
an il in called, on the table. This 10 mistake L
voted for the proposition as the recollection oil all
present, as well az the journals, prove. The mis-
take on bis part probably arose from hearing the
resps nse of Mr. Felch OF Mich. who voted In the
negative, and whose name, when called 10 the
Chamber sounds so much like my own that we can
rot ourselves distinguish them by the SOUND, oa5
we are obliged to guide ourselves by the alPhaoe''
icsl arrangement
He also seems TO understand that l supported
the proposition OF Mr.. Dawson OF Geo. THIS 10
also 10 a certain extent mistake. did not vote
10 eperaft that propos ton on the bill, or 20 make
the law Of the land bat did vote TO engraft 1t upon
the proposed amendment OF Mr. bradoury.-
When it was 30 engraftsd, voted against the
whole amendment
To those who are aware that was opposed 20 the
bill. and to the purpose Of Mr. Bradburys amend
mept nv course can require no explanation. That
purpose was 10 secure the support oil certain Sena
tors who would not vote for the bill as 1t stood, nor
could they 20 for Mr.. Dawson's proposition The
incorporation OF the latter into Bradourys amend
ment tended either to defeat the amendment or, II
that were adopted TO defeat the bill. 1t did both.
In the first instance, 1t defeated the amendment
Upon the return of Sena tor, accidentally absent
| the smendmen with some slight aud unimPortant
modification, was pressed again aud iucceedsd by
| q majority Of one. This rendered the Dill unacceP',
able TO several Senators, who would nave
II bsd Rrsdbnrvs original proposition been adopted
and II was ascertained that in Its present shape
could NOT pass The attempt OF MIR. Pearce, ,ne
next day. TO get rid OF the incubus proven Issa
| the bill The only mode In wnch ne couo aP
| n,oscb his object consistently with parliamentary
rule vas 10 move 10 strike out all relating TO New
Mex co and insert the same, with the exception OF
Mr. Dawson's amendment The question being d.
vided-i e. frat upon striking out, and secondly,
inserting-it gave an opportunity Tor those VINO
were opposed TO combining the various topics In tue
bill 10 90 with those Of it's friends who rejected Mr.
DIS proposition in the first instance for striking
out and then with the other side in refusing TO In
sert Thus the provision for New Mexico was
Topped off and could not be restored. After several
Intellectual efforts for that purpose, 1t became aP'
parent that the symmetry Of the bill was destroyed,
and nothing remained but to complete the separa'
ton. Texas and California were Topped on In sue
cesson, and Utah stood alone.
This explains alton deem due 10 myself lestthose
not acquainted with parliamentary tactics should
confound an attempt to embarrass proposition 10
which is oppored, with the serious support Oh
proposition to make it the law Of the land:
Very respectfully yours, SAM 8 PHELPS
I0- If we clearly understand Mr.. Phelps's
explanation, he voted to engraft the Dawson
amendment on that of Mr.. Bradbury, while
be utterly disapproved and condemned the
purpose Of said (Dawson) amendment, in
order that by its adoption the bill should be
destroyed He hints that those who are
surprised at his course are "not acquainted
with Parliamentary tactics" Very likely.
If those tactics are inconsistent with candor,
honesty, and straightforward support of
the right and rejection Of the wrong, we think
good many will prefer to continue ignorant
of them. Suppose Mr.. Phelps's calculation
had proved erroneous, and that the Dawson
amendment, by his vote fastened on the
bill, had in consequence become the law
Of the land, how would Vermont have liked
his explanation and her own position We
believe Messrs. SEWARD, BALDWIN, DAYTON,
HALE, &c. disiked the Omnibus bill quite as
heartily as Mr.. Phelps did, but neither of
them resorted to the expedient Of voting for
| the Daws1n amendment in order to compass
its defeat. Ed. Tri6.