Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-05-13

two s and acquiesced in by them for the sake Of peace
and hrmony. II had been violated and again
py In North, who advocated its sanctity but he
suggeed did not become the aggressor to teach lessons
I Of juste and morality.
Mr. CARPENTER replied to the arguments which had
been ued IN support of the BILL and earnestly opposed
its passage. rE,
Mr.. WEED believed the Missouri line to be violation
Of the institution encroached upon the rights Of the
South denying them an equal share in the public do
main lie should therefore vote for the bill because it
contai1d this feature and also because it gave to the
peope these Territories the power to control the ques
] ton ofEavery.
/ Mr.. farley said that the North were unanimously
opposed to the extension Of slavery The measure under
constellation looked to the extension of slavery over ter
rtory pw Free and opposition to it not Of an abo
ton kH but assumed general character So long
the Missouri compromise should remain on the statute
book very could not enter these Territories but repeal
it, AMI it could then go there He therefore opposed
to tspeal either directly indirectly and believed it
| to be constitutional.
| RICHARDSON alluded to the charges of aggression
which had been urged against the South and admitted
that ts measure was an aggression but an aggression
hayin Northern origin 1t was q blow at Northern
rights it was true but it struck by paricidal
hand and the North might well exclam in the language
of thelying Caesar, Get tn, Brute !" for it blow
whicheame from the hand Of friend repeal of the
Missouri act of 1920 would destroy all confidence in
promles and concessions, and thereby undermine the
parsof our Government. II would be direct viola
ton ola solemn compact made by the States Of the Con-
federay in this hail. the justice and wisdom Of which had
for mde than thirty years grown with growth and
strengthened with strength He further opposed the
bill on the ground that the public interests did require
it. and because it would violate solemn treaty obga
tions With the Indians. ..
Mr. H. before his hour had expired took his seat with
Que concluding his arguments when the floor award
ed to Mr.. CoLQUIrT.
Mr. CAMPBELL said that he understood that the Chair
had been making arrangements exactng of gentlemen
fatnfnsr a.
only occupy portion Of their hour He did know
whether this was So but should like be informed on
the subject. lCres Of order,' g rdernl
The CHAIRMAN, (Mr. oLDs.) The Chair has exacted
no pletges The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HARRIsoN)
stated hat he desired only fifteen minutes.
Mr.. HUNT In behalf of the people of the United
and OF the members Of this House. loud cries Of
order order,"l protest against such proceedings
They breach the liberty Of parliament and Of the
right Of speech allowed in this free and glorious country
luproGious cries of sorder" order'l appeal to
every American upon thi floor to put stop this
rage. Cries OF order, and much sensation
The CHAIRMAN requested gentlemen to maintain
order. $3.50
Mr.. CLINGMAN hoped the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. (oLQUITT) would proceed with his remarks
Mr.. CAMPBELL / do not rise on behaIf of M co,
league Hedoesnot wish me Rode merely rose to state
what the current impression throughout the COMMITS
tee, that these arrangements had b,en made.
Mr. HUNT. happears to me thai this is question Of
privilege.
The c HARTMAN called the gentleman, ), oder
Nh HUNT. l askto be heard on quessoa of pr;v;
ege appeal to the Chair to hear me, and aenana ~
right in my place. 1919
The CHAIRMAN. If the gentleman rises to ,urs.
ton Of order the Chsir will hear him.
Mr. HUNT. rise to this question: that the gentf-
who takes his seat saying that lie has had but fifteen
minutes has the right proceed 10 order for hour
And take occasion to say that hipe the gentleman in
regard to rights others and HIMSELF will use his prv
egs to speak hour, and think the House ought to
call upon him doso in order mat it may protect its
own rights against any trckery private understanding,
or any improper conduct whatevs
The CHAIRMAN. The geDaeman's point Of order is
decided The gentleman frem Ohio (Mr HARRIsoN) is
entitled to the floor.
Mr. HARRISON. wasfavored by the courtesy of the
Chairman with the privilege of occupying the foor and
was told by him that b. could not afford my proper
time.
Vo1cEs That'sft." "That's what we desired to
knew" Considerable sensation.
Mr.. HUNT. Tie Chair could not c6crd proper time
The CHAIRMAN hoped gentlemen would wait unt;i
the gentleman from Ohio should finish his .st~--sa..
Mr.. HARRISON stated that he had requested the
Chair to allow him the floor to-day that ne might denver
formed him that he had in his power give him fifteen
twenty minutes. He mr. H. told him he would
cept the arrangement. At the time the Chairman
told him that having obtained the floor he would have
the right to proceed for hour should he choose to
exact it.
The CHAIRMAN explained that he had been solicited
to give the floor the gentleman from Ohio by several
Of his colleagues who told him that the gentleman would
scented to do SO.
Mr. SAGE inquired if similar requirement was not
exaced from Of the Massachusetts, members who adj
dressed the committee to-day?
The CHAIRMAN stated what arrangement was made
between two Of the Massachusetts, members.
Mr. ELIOT, of Massachusetts,, corroborated the state
ment Of the Chair and said that he assened to the
rangement that hour should be divided between him
self and colleague.
Mr. HUNT protested against such suggestions from the
Chair. There hour rule, and the Chair must
ecute the law.
The CHAIRMAN stated that he would execute the
rule and if his conduct did with the approba
ton of the committee he would cheerfuly resign the
chair.
Mr.. STEPHENS, of Georgia, stated that the practice
which had been disclosed the Chair had been used
since he had been in Congress He considered it, instead
of being outrage great accommodation to gentle
men who desired to speak.
Mr.. HUNT protested against such arrangements as q
retrenchment of privilege.
Mr.. DAVIS, of Rhode Island, thought that i'm
portant question every should have his hour.
Mr. C0LQUlTT then took the floor, and addressed the
committee in favor of the BILL
Mr.. UPIiAM followed the opposite side, strongly
and urgently opposing any repeal of the Missouri
promise.
Mr.. MAXWELL then obtained the floor, when the COM
mittee rose. ..-
Aud the House at half-past 10 o'clock adjourned.
larrexznanlerxszzuses:nxnra
... LIBERIA