The daily union., 1852-03-12

DOdt, ntdIu sldcWeHts the "Su'
on 10 Richmond with him After he got to Richmond,
the agent OF the Review met with Mr., Parker in the oil
nee OF MIR Richie, the editor OF the Richmond Enqa-
and he showed the paper. with those names ana The
Review, 10 Mr. Richie and other gentlemen. l have
made this statement for the purpose OF inviting any ex
PLANTATION that may be offered hereafter.
asked the gentleman from illinois . ii he was able to
state whether Judge Douglas signed that paper before or
after The leading article in the January number print
signed previous TO the appearance OF The January number
and after IT," AS the gentleman rose on behalf OF
Judge Douglas. and his particular friend, took il for
happy to hear his statement This is simple matter
and ought to be cleared up without difficulty There is
no in foging by enargng on The fidelity OF the li-
nos democracy. never questioned their hdely. There
is no use in foging by saying that made assaults
have made no assault But il the gentleman considered
single point that ought 10 settle the whole matter
have never seen that paper OF recommendation. The
gentleman asks why we do not produce and publish It,
answer, that when last il in the possession oil
the agent of The Review. and is now probably in the
hands of the conductors, the agent, some
neced with the establishment; neither saw the paper
read it, but have been told what contained There
signed to it, long after the assault appeared IN the
January number the names OF certain members OF Con-
gress. do not know whether there were any candi-
dates for the presidency" among them or not Judge
Douglas signed that paper and his name, with separate
line. cordially recommending the Review, is below the
other upon the list, which names were signed in
the month of February, when the agent of that Review
in this city on his way 10 Richmond. Now, ask
Gm 10s i he g
~"6-"
number % appearedE @ And ask him il Judge Douglas did
not sign il when the agent here, and when other
members OF Congress signed IL
! MIR. RICHARDSON l will answer that question
most cheerully, for have motive 10 conceal any
thing Judge Douglas has means OF telling when
he signed that paper except, said by the receipt
The receipt was given for two years subscription at the
same time that he put bis signature to the paper and that
dated, that the day on which Judge Douglas signed
the paper -,
article. That can state by authority
Mr.. BRECKENRIDGE / think it is probable the gem
lleman from Illinois [Mr RIcHARDsoN] was right when
he conec,ured, in his remarks there might be mistake
in the date of that receipt he says Is dated the 9th
OF January because by substituting the 9th OF February
strike he Which n s was
ence be drawn. Judge Douglas cannot fix the date
unless the receipt fixes it. stated distinctly, and repeat
that there may be misunderstanding, that II
the receipt is right the statement made is correct;
the receipt is wrong may be otherwise But, be that
may, fact established and that is that Judge
Douglas condemned and did all he could TO prevent the
course pursued by the Review.
The gentleman says that the agent had the paper and
that i may be in the Of d the editors tor 6s 9l ne
cratic Review, understand repudaie this agent alto
gether. He was the agent OF the old concern have
subscriptions. But the present editsrs repudiated him
altogether, and he was not their agent at all.
Mr. BREcK,NRIDGE 81 Whether be was Their their
OF the January number OF The Review.
Mr.. RICHARDSON. had supposed the gentleman
s MIR. ' BRECKENRIDGE never saw either the man
Mr. RICHARDSON. The paper can certainly be
Mr.. BRECKENRIDGE. / sincerely hope the paper
may be published But call the attention of the COM
mee 10 the fact that have not got i and cannot be
supposed TO have but ought TO be in the possession
of connected with the Democratic Review. be-
cause when last was in the possession OF the
agent OF the Review, who had large number of copies
nf fhe nerindlca with him. and acting Tor the
motion OF its Interests
Mr. WASHBURN. The time yielded to the gentle
man has expired, and must claim the floor.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Maine
longer yield the floor TO the gentleman from Kentucky
| Mr.. WASHBURN. ! cannot.
| Mr. BRECKENRIDGE | hope the gentleman from
Maine will give opportunity to make single
statement in reference The conversation with Judge
Douglas, TO which the gentleman from Illinois has au-
Mr. WAsHBURN Well, will yield for few mo-
Mr. BRECKENRIDGE. / have now said all desire
to say in reference the January number OF the Demo
cratic Review, and hope have put myself on proper
ground The February number has been referred to by
the gentleman from Illinois That number, 1t will be
recoleced contains sort OF continuation of the article
in the January number but in addition to the general
assault covery upon the other candidates, ii contains
violent assault on General Butler, by name. The gen.
emsn produces letter, dated some time in February,
and said to have been from the city of New York by
Mr. Sanders, the conductor of the Review in answer to
telegrzphic despatch which he received from Judge
Douglas, informing the Judge that be could not control
the columns OF that paper and that the editor would pub
lsh what he pleased The gentleman also states that
had conversation with Judge Douglas, and well knew,
before made my SPEECH that he had attempted 10 pre-
the appearance OF the article in the February nuns
be II have the consent OF the gentleman, as he has
alluded to IT, will repeat the substance of the converse
ton between Judge Douglas and myself presume,
from his having referred TO it. that he wishes me TO do so
will first remark that most OF my comments and cIti-
csms were intended for the January number oil that Re-
view, and my remarks intended defence OF all
the members OF the democratic party who were assaled
in that article will not repeat that conversation, be-
cause il private one and II is suggested to me that
| | had better not give it,
| loud cries of "Gve itg and "Oh, nor'1
/ Mr. BRECKENRIDGE. ! do moi think il material
that should do The gentleman wishes TO know
why made any alusion al all to the February number
Douglas had tried to stop the publication OF that num-
bef
Mr. RICHARDSON. No that is not it, The point
that make is this not that the gentleman alluded TO IT.
for expected he would allude TO but that, with TINS
knowledge that Judge Douglas had no power 70 control
the Democratic Review, he yet did not acquit MIN o II
democrats ought do, when they are saushed that ne
had nothing to do with IT,
i Mr. BRECKENRIDGE The gentleman complains
then because after was informed that Judge Douglas
tried To stop the publication of that number did not IN
my speech expressly acquit him OF the power to control
the Review / answer that in the first place, never
charged him with having any such power lhe gen,le-
man has seen
! 'Gofgons. hydras, and chimeras Dire"
that do not see in my speech, and that the democracy
on this floor do moi see in it.
Mr. HART and Mr. POLK here requested that the con-