Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-04-19
THE NUMBER OF SPEECHES MADE
ON THE NEBRASKA BILL.

No question has, in latter times, attracted
more attention and elected more discussion
more able, elaborate and thorough discussion
than the Nebraska bill. Beginning in the SEN
ate, it was retained there for several months, IN
order to allow all the senator's who we're so
disposed to express their opinions in regard to
it. When all had spoken on it who desired to
speak, it was passed one morning, near the
break Of day, by a very triumphant majority.
1t then passed TO the House of Representatives,
where it will probably remain, undisposed OF, a
standing bone of contention, for several months.
1t may be of interest to our readers to know
that there we're twenty eight set speeches made
in the Senate on the. subject, seventeen for,
and eleven against the bill; and SO far, in the
House, there have been delivered thirty-one
speeches fifteen on one side, and sixteen on
the other side of the question. According to
our recollection, the following are the names
Of the gentlemen who have participated in the
debate. We have classed the speeches in the
House as for or against the bill, not wishing
t, be understood however, as saying that oil OF
those gentlemen are unqualified for or against
ii. We will cheerfnly correct any error that
we may fall into:
SENATE.-=For Senate BU.-Messrs. Badger,
Brodhead, Brown, Butler, Glass; Dawson, Dixon,
Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, Hunter, Jones OF
Tennessee, Norris, Petit, Thomson Of New
Jersey, Toombs, Toucey, and Weller-l7.
against the BU.-Messrs. Bell, Chase, Coop
err, Everett, Fessenden, Houston, Seward, Smith,
Sumner, Wade, and Clayton, (who, however, is
in favor of the repeal of the Missouri com.
promise)-ll.
HousE.-FortheS Senate bd-Messrs. j. c. Al
len, Of Illinois; Barksdale, Of Mississippi; Brock
inridge of Kentucky Bridges, of Pennsylvania;
Brooks, Of South Carolina; Caruthers, Of Mis-
souri,; Clingman, of North Carolina; Ewing,
Of Kentucky Faulkner, of Virginia; Keitt,
of South Carolina; Macdonald, Of Maine,
Preston, Of Kentucky Smith, of Tennessee;
Stephens, q Georgia and Wright, of Penn
sylvania-l5.
Aqainst The Senate JM-Messrs. Chandler,
Of Pennsylvania; Cullom, of Tennessee; Fen
ton, of New York Franklin, of Maryland;
Hunt, ofLouisiana Mace, of Indiana; Cut
ting, of New York; Matteson, of New York;
Meacham, of Vermont; Millson, of Virginia;
Nichols, of Ohio; Moron, of Illinois; Gerrit
Smith, of New York; Washburne, of Illinois;
Washburn, of Maine; and Yates-l6.
1t is not unlikely that this statement con
iains some inaccuracies, as it has been made
out in haste and more from memory than from
any special examination into the subject.
Several, if we mistake not, have spoken
against the Senate bill with the Badger and
Clayton amendments, who have expressed
their appreciation Of the main doctrine en-
bodied in ito wit, the repeal of the Missouri
restriction, and the establishment Of congress.
sional non-interyention. Some have objected
to the one amendment, some TO the other and
some TO both.
We have already said more than once thai
the debates on this important bin have beer
distinguished by much ability, learning, aad
research. Indeed, these debates will form al,
interesting epoch in our parliamentary annals.