The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-12-27
THE STRUGGLE IN 1854 ON THE NFBRAs-
KA BILL.

ing Mr. Banks for certain vote given during
the proceedings on the Nebraska bill. A few
words will set this matter in its true light.
Monday, May 9Th, 1854, the bill with its for
ty sections was taken up in the House, the I'M
precedented process having first been resorted
to- of laying aside, one by one, seventeen inter-
vening bills on the calendar, many of them of
great practical importance.
As it was evident that there was a real ma
jority of the members determined, contrary TO
the will of a majority of the People, to force
the bill through, the minority, we thought and
said at the time, ought to have resisted this
process, by refusing to vote, and leaving the
Committee without quorum. This could east
ly have been done: many, however, thought it
not advisable; bat, were they therefore dishon-
est? No friend of Freedom harbored such
suspicion.
The next two days were occupied with
speeches on the repeal of the Missouri Compro-
mise. The following day Thursday the poll
cy of the gag was initiated by motion of Mr..
Richardson to close debate the next day at
twelve o'clock. The minority, aroused at last,
nobly resisted (avaling itself of the rules of the
House) for thirty-six hours, when an adjourn
ment took place. Saturday, the contest was re-
newed, but postponed till Monday, 18th.
The following day had been set apart for the
consideration of the Pacific Railroad bill, and
it was hoped, if the minority could protract the
struggle till then, the special order would come
tIa
But, some of our friends, among them Messrs
Banks, Mace, Edgerton, and Dean, apprehend-
ed that all rules all precedents, even the Speak
er himself, should he interpose any obstacle,
were to be over-ridden, for the purpose of fore
ing the bill to final action. Besides, few of
the Southern Wings who had acted with the
North, fearing for their position at home, be-
gan to entertain thoughts of an amicable ar
rangement.
Under these circumstances, having no time
to consult with the great body of Anti Nebras-
ka men, and yet anxious to secure at least a few
days for discussion, they consented to vote for
suspension of the rules so as to enable Mr.. Rich
ardson to move that the Pacific Railroad bill
be postponed till the following Wednesday week,
that the Nebraska bill be taken up, and the
general debate on it be closed the following
Saturday, with the distinct understanding that
the debate in Committee under the five min.
utes rule, which allows the introduction of
amendments and speech of five minutes in
explanation and support of each of them, should
be untrammeled.
Our language, at the time, in regard to this
vote of some of our friends, was" We think
they committed an error in this matter" but
"that the majority of them acted from honest
motives, and thought they were gaining a sub
stantial advantage, we do not doubt"
We presented our views of the transaction in
another number of the Era, in reply to strict
ures of the New York Tribune, and they were
reprinted, and accepted by that paper, as a
vindication of Mr.. Banks and the majority of
his associates.
To show that they had reason for their ap-
prehension of being cut off from all privilege
of debate we may state that the following Sat
urday, the moment the House went into Com
mittee of the Whole on the state of the Union,
Mr.. Stephens, of Georgia, for the purpose of
precluding all debate under the Ave minutes
rule-a privilege understood 70 have been fully
recognised the preceding Monday-moved to
strike out the enacting clause of the bill.
Recollect, only the first of the forty sections
of the bill had yet been under consideration.
The effect of Mr.. Stephenss motion, if passed,
would be, to exclude all further amendments,
and, under the 10th rule, would be equivalent
to a rejection of the bill. The next step would
be for the Committee to rise, and report &C.
cordingly to the House. The previous question
was then to be demanded by Mr. Richardson's,
under the operation of which the report would
be voted down by the friends of the bill, and
then Mr.. Richardson would move his substitute,
spring the previous question, excluding all
amendments, and force dirse. vote upon it.
In this way, Mr.. Edgerton's substitute, taa bill
of the isst session, passed by large majority
in the House. would be shut out, as we'll as all
other efforts of the minority to modify or amend
the bill. All this appeared from the bold ex-
| PLANTATION by Mr.. Stephens Of his object.
Now, this | 9th rule of the House was pass-
ed we believe, in the year 1922, and had long
been obsolete, having been superseded by the
five minutes rule, and the uniform practice of
the House under it for years. If considered
binding, then the five minutes rule was virtually
annulled, and it is in the power of majority,
| at any time, to exclude all amendments from
any bill whatever; in other words, to prevent
all deliberate, enlightened legislation. OF
course, the point was made, that the motion OF
| Mr.. Stephens Wss out of order; but Mr.. Odds,
appealing from the uniform practice of the
| House, in other words, its compop lew, to an
obsolete rule, overruled the point, and the NO.
| ton of Mr.. Stephens prevailed.
A motion that the Committee rise was then
taken by teliers-yeas lO2, nays 2-no quorum
| Now, what is the dusy of the Chairman, when
| there is no quorum votingY IL e defined in
! the 10th rule of the House, as follows.
Whenever the Committee of the Whole on
| the state ef :5e Union, or the Committee of the
| Whole House, nnds itself without quorum,
| the Chairman SHALL cAySE THE ROLL OF THE
| HOUSE TO BE CALLED, AND THEREJPoN THE
COMMITTEE SHALL RISE, AND THE CHAiRNAA
| SHALL REPORT THE NAMES OF THE ABsENTEEs TIC
THE HOUsE, WHICH SHALL BE ENTERED ON THE
| JOURNAL" Dec. .S, l847.
| The Committee Of the Whole on the state o.
the Union found itself, on motion to rise
,OithOat a quorum, and DR.. Odds, the Chairman
was therefore bound to cause the roll to b.
called, and, the coARittee then rising, to re
| port the names Of the absenices to the House.
He did neither-he grossly violated tie rule
| and outraged the Committee hv refusing I.