The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-03-26
WAsHINoToN CITY, March 25, 1850.
L. .acI Al


To the Editors of the Republic:
GENTLEMEN: Mr.. CLINeMANs letter in the Re
public of this morning calls for very short reply
| from me.
Mr.. CLINoMAN says he has seen speech OF mine
purporting" to have been delivered in the House
| of Representatives, March 6, 1850; and then he
| says | made some twenty or thirty extracts
from speeches of his delivered :" within the last hall
| dozen years"
AS to the propriety of Mr.. C.'s saying speech
purportng'' to have been delivered, would refer
him to his speeches in the Congressional Globe in
| 1874 and 1913, when the hour rule was in force
and, leaving out the long quotations which print
ed, but could not read, have doubt it will be
| found Mr.. CLINoMAN's purported" essays are
| longer than my speech.
As to the quotations from the speeches of the
:" last half dozen years." if my colleague intends
to plead the statute of limitations, | reply,
should be glad to hear an answer to the extract
from his speech of December %, lS47. hope the
| statute does not bar all examination of that
Mr.. CLINGMAN says: " In fact, many of his quo
tations refer to points to which he made alu-
sion whatever in the of his speech" To
this assertion must give plain, distinct and
qualified denial; and if Mr.. CLISeMAN will either
REFER as he can to the reporter, to the memory
marks have not the slightest doubt he will be un-
able to find another member who will agree with
him in this statement. say distinctly, referred
to no point TO which did not make allusion in the
course of my speech. If Mr.. C. will state the point
or points to which he refers, think satisfy
him of his
He says he could not, with parliamentary pro
priety," reply in the House TO this speech. Why
Is it supplementary to reply to a speech
| purported TO have been delivered in the House
than to reply to speeches delivered in th Senate
| to refer 10 newspaper statements, as Mr.. c. has
| done?
Parliamentary proprietyr els Saul also
among the prophetsS"
Mr.. c. also says: at would, in my judgment,
| however, have been more appropriate for him 10
| have assumed ostensibly, as he appears 10 have
| done really, the character Of pamphleteer." In
this line of business must be allowed to say, l am
not presumptuous enough to enter into competi-
ton with my colleague. Whether my colleague
| writes on mineralogy, botany, chemistry, or upon
the mysteries of finance, as pamphleteer he is far
beyond my reach. cannot compete with him Gin
assuming the character of pamphleteer." for his
essays are far beyond the grasp of understanding
far greater than my own.
| Mr. c. has centre confidence" in his liability To
make a successful defence" No one doubts his
confidence" Let the public judge Of the defence
when Il is made Il is far easier 10 say, "having
disposed of the speech Of my colleague" than To
| answer Il.
have been very grossly abused by correspond
| ents of newspapers, ON account Of the speech 70
which Mr.. CLrSoMAS has referred. ] stand by
every word ! have uttered; and am very willing 70
abide the opinion ofmy constituents, Of both parties
after they shall have read for themselves.
Very respectfully.
1 EDw STANIY