Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-05-27

brenner, Sergeant-a Arms; John M. Johnson
Postmaster and q. w. McKnew Doorkeeper
Mr.. WHEELER moved that the resolution be
laid on the table; and the motion was agreed To-
yeas Ill, nays co.
MIR. GIDDINGS addressed the House in favor
of The adoption Of the plurality rule, saying that
the Wing and Democratic parties, in 1919, by this
means, selected the gentleman from Georgia (Mr
COBB as The Speaker The country approved
the act, and the Republicans were to-day prepared
10 follow the precedent. This body could moi
be organized on any other principle
Mr.. COBB of Georgia, in reply, said that The
plurality rule, at The period referred 10, was
adopted in caucus Of the Wing party and re-
ported by committee OF conference 10 the De-
mocratc caucus, but the Democrats rejected il
by decided majority. II was afterwards offered
in the House by Mr.. Stanton, of Tennessee and
adopted by the votes of the Wing party and a
minority of the Democratic party. There was nc
one more severe in his denuncations OF the plu-
rality rule, al that time, than the gentleman from
Ohio, MR. GIDDIaGs,) who sligmazed il as wrong
in principle, dangerous in its tendency, and ought
not 10 be adopted.
The resolution Of Mr.. THoRINGToN, declar-
ing Mr.. CAMPBELL, of Ohio, Speaker, received The
votes of fifty members of the House, while
fhytwo members of the Republican party voted
against IT, If the latter had voted for the resolu-
ton, Mr.. CAMPBELL would have have been elected
Speaker The issue with them, therefore, is,
BANKS and Reorganization in preference TO another
member OF their own party, against whom they
could have political objection.
Mr.. GIDDINGS replied, insisting that the
country and the world will hold the Democrats
re ponsible for the adoption of the plurality rule
in 1S40.
Mr. LETCHER read from the debates of ls49
10 show that Mr.. GIDDINGs himself then said
that the plurality rule was forced on the House
by the Wing party, aided by small portion
of the members the other side of the House
(he Democrats.) He asked the gentleman what
had induced him 10 believe what he considered
wrong in 1919, is right in 1856 and incidentally
alluded to the remarks of Mr. BANKS, the other
day. about the white and black races.
Mr. BANKS avowed that amalgation was as
repugnant TO him TO any other gentleman in
this House
Mr.. LETCHER quoted Mr.. BANKs's speech TO
show that The just inference from the remarks
was, that the gentleman was in favor of amaga-
nation.
Mr. BANKS replied that the gentleman had
misrepresented his language; he had not gwen 10
the subject study.
Mr.. LETCHER asked tue gentleman 10 just
listen 10 him, while he read from his Mr.. BANKss)
speech, follows " So far as have studied the
subject, il seems to me to be the universal law,
that the weaker is always absorbed and disappears
in the stronger race. Whether the black race of
this continent, any other part Of the world, is
equal 10 The white race, can only be determined
by abs orpiion and disaI pearance Of one or the
other; and propose 10 wait until the respective
races can be properly subjected 10 such phoso-
phical test beioreI give decisive answer"
Mr.. TAPPAN contended that The anii-Nebraska
men have not majority in The House, and that
this fact was shown by the vote for Speaker
yesterday. The responsibility of no. organizing
the House rests on those who oppose The plurality
rue.
The debate was further continued. involving
the question Of responsibility for the failure
game The House.
Mr.. PURVIANCE offered resolution, 10 the
effect that debate shall cease, and that the first
business before the House shall be the adoption
of the plurality rule. He subsequently accepted
as n substitute, resolution of Mr.. Cliogman, to
the following effect: that on the meeting of the
House each day, until Speaker shall be elected,
The first business in order, except motions, shall
be TO vote twice, vira poee, for a Speaker and,
until that is done, there shall be no debate under
any pretext And after the said two votes shall
be taken, il shall not be in order to vote a third
time on that day.
Mr.. ORR, in order 10 give time 10 the friends of
the proposition TO amend il, in order 10 make il
accept able In gentlemen who had proposed amend
ments, moved that the House adjourn which
motion was agreed 10, at quarter past three
O'clock