Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1850-01-12
: Flurrlss of the whis whales

day (Dec. 27th) by Mr.. Giddings, whcreupon
his iurrics and those Of his friends Schenck,
Rockwell, Ashmun and Vinton, (all of whom
came to his rcscue) were such as caused terri-
bic agitation of the political waters. The scene
was deeply interesting, but we must crowd its
principal incidents into very brief space.
The main point Of debate filing many col
umns was, the Anti-Slavery character of Robt.
G. winthrop-whether it was such as entitled
him to the vote of Mr.. Giddings and his friends.
The Northern Wing presses, with that true
PccksnifFian air which they so well know how
to assume had accused Mr.. G. Of virtually
clecting Cobb the STAKEHOLDER by refusing to
vote for Winthrop, that pink of Wing Anti-Sla-
vory Against this accusation, Mr.. Giddings
took occasion to protest, as most absurd and un-
just He showed that the election Of Cobb was
the inevitable result Of the adoption Of the plu-
rality rule by the Wings themselves, who might
at any time, If they had so willcd, have pla-
ccd in the chair either Northern Democrat,
(Nlr. Strong,) or Northern Wing, (Mr. Ste
vens,) known to be true to the principles Of
freedom.
This brought up Mr.. Schenck, Of Ohio, who
undertook the task of showing that Mr.. Win
throp himself was a true Anti-Slavery man and
entitled to Mr.. G.'s vote as against Cobb Thus
challenged, Mr.. Giddings, amidst many inter.
ruptions, gave his reasons for not confiding in
Mr.. w. as true to Liberty. That he had voted
for the Wilmot Proviso he admitted, but he
had also. as a member of tho Wing party, vo-
ted against pledging the Wings of Massachu-
sctts not to support candidates who were oppo-
sed to that Proviso. lie had also constructed
the Committees of tho House so as to favor the
institution Of slavery. Mr.. G.'s objections to
that gentleman were also founded upon tho acts
of his whole public life, and particularly upon
what had been said in Wing caucus upon the
Saturday evening previous to the commence
ment of the present session, when the gentle
mans colleague Mr. Ashmunl had said that it
was no part of the Wing policy to adopt the
Wilmot Proviso.
Mr.. Ashmun charged Mr.. G. with misrcpro-
scnting him, but the latter referred to the re-
port in the Wing journals, in which tho former
was said to have uttered this language; "He
fMr. Ashmunl was not for making any such
things [as the wilmot Proviso, Abolition in the
District &C. a test for the national Wing party,
and when, in Massachusetts, such a thing had
been attempted, he, in common with Mr.. Wm-
Mrop and OF ers, had successfully resisted any
such new interpolation into the Wing creed"
Mr.. G. did not read this, not having the report
at hand, but simple reference to it was enough
to show that Mr.. Winthrop and his Wing col
leagues could not safely be trusted by the North.
Mr.. Ashmua's effort to wriggle away from the
point thus made was pitiful indeed.
Mr.. Winthrop, writhing under tho faithful ex-
posurc of Giddings, replied with genuine Phar-
isaical dignity, that he had been assailed upon
the one side by the gentleman from Ohio, as
having been most ultra in opposition to every
thing like Free Soilism, in opposition to North
ern sentiment upon the subject of slavery;
while on the other hand, he had been held up
by the gentleman from Tennessee as having in
every respect gone against Southern views, and
used the power and patronage of this House
against them. Now he was quite willing 10 al
low these counter statements, these counter
speeches, to go out to the country to reply the
ono to the other.
Mr.. Giddings met this by tho question:
I" Docs the honorable gentleman from Massa-
chusetts admit that the argument of the gentle
man from Tennessee is correct ;" This was a
stumpcr; Mr.. w. put himself on his dignity
and declined TO answer.
Mr.. Winthrop denied that he had constituted
the Committees in question as he had been ac-
cused of doing. The Committee on the District
of Columbia was composed of Northern and
Southern men, and they had reported bill to
abolish the slave trade at the Capital Mr.. Gid
dings denied that they had made such a report.
They had reported only in favor of the introduc-
tion of slaves into the District as merchandise,
but the colorcd people of the District were left
to all the horrors and crimes of the commerce.
Mr.. Winthrop also charged Mr.. Giddings
with uttering what was false In regard to his
course in respect to the Mexican war. He had
not, as Mr.. g. had declared, spoken in favor of
the war in Wing caucus. He did not deny,
however, that he voted for the bill recognizing
the war and providing the means for carrying it
on, nor that he had counsellod his party to do
likewise. Mr. G.. quoted the authority of Hon.
E. ID. Culver of New York to sustain him in
what he said on this point
Mr.. Schenck rcsortcd to the trick of quoting
from Wendell Phillips in order to attach odium
to Mr.. Giddings, as if the latter were in some
way identified with the forme.. Tho passage
quoted was that from Mr.. P.'s New York
speech, in which he avowcd open hostility to
the Constitution, and said that the Abolitionists
had sent the Wings into an alliance with the
South-"a natural alliance-the lords of the
loom and the lords of the lash associated"
Mr.. Holmes of S. C. dipped into the contro-
versy to notice the significant fact, that Mr..
Winthrop and his friends were all very anxious
TO prove themselves anti-slavery and entitled on