The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-04-03
THE NATIONAL ERA: WASHINGTON, D. c, ApRT. 8, 1856


Of the men who had supported Banks, only
twenty voted in the NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS., Bliss,
Colfax, Day, Dickson, Dodd, Granger, Grow,
Horton of N. Y, Hughston, Mace, Meacham,
Mott, Nichols, Spinner, Stanton, Tyson, Wade,
| E. b. Washburne, Watson.
| 2. The question was then taken on the mo-
ton of Mr.. Chaffee to reconsider the second for
the previous question, and, of course, the read
er will expect to hear that it was reconsider
ed-but, gentlemen seemed to be bewildered,
voting at this early period, according to no
principle. The House refused to reconsider
the call for the previous question-yeas Il,
nays sc!
The only Banks men who voted nay, were
Bliss, Colfax, Cumback, Day, Dickson, Dodd,
Flagler, Giddings, Granger, Grow, Horton of
N. Y, Hughston, Kelsey, Knowlton, Mace,
Matteson, McCarty, Meacham, Morgan, Mott,
Nichols, Perry, Simmons, Spinner, Wade, E.
B. Washburne, Watson, Woodworth-28.
Now, we ask the reader to notice that from
this point, the only Republican members who
voted steadily against all motions intended or
calculated to obstruct, mutilate, or defeat the
bill, or to prevent fair expression of the opin-
ion of the House on Humphrey Marshalls
amendment, were the following:
Bliss, Day, Dodd, Giddings, Grow, Horton
of N. Y, Hughston, Kelsey, Mace, Meacham,
Mott, Nichols, Spinner, Wade, E. B. Wash
burne, and Watson-l6 in all-but to this list
must be added the name of Mr.. Washburne of
Wisconsin, who, being detained at home by
sickness, announced, through his brother, to the
House, that if present, he should vote against
Marshalls amendment, and in favor of the bill
| as reported by the Committee.
3. The question now required on ordering
the main question, and it was explained that,
| if this were decided in the affirmative, the first
| question would be on the motion to recommit.
| Mr.. Meacham, Chairman of the Committee,
stated that he had made the motion to recon-
nit merely to save the bill from going upon
the Speakers table the day before, but he did
not wish it recommitted. Mr.. Campbell, of
Ohio, moved to lay the whole subject on the
| table--yeas 60, nays 94-and the Banks men
voting nay, we're
Barbour, Benson, Billinghurst, Bliss, Davis
of Mass, Day, Dick, Dickson, Dodd, Giddings,
Grow, Horton of N. Y, Hughston, Kelsey,
Knowlton, McCarty, Meacham, Mott, Nichols,
Pelton, Perry, Petit Spinner, Stanton, Wade,
E. B. Washburne, Watson, Woodworth--28.
Had all these gentlemen voted with any CO.
herence of purpose at subsequent stages, the
| bill would have been carried
| 4. The main question was now ordered-yeas
SO, nays Ga. 1t had been refused the day be-
fore-yeas Is, nays 80!
The Banks men now voting to order it,
were Barbour, Billinghurst, Bliss, Bufiing
ton, Colfax, Day, Dodd, Emrie, Flagler, Gil
BERT Granger, Grow, Harlan, Horton of N. Y,
Hughston, Kelsey, Knowlton, Mace, Meacham,
Mott, Nichols, Perry, Sabin, Spinner, Stanton,
Tappan, Wade, Walbridge Z. B. Washburne,
1. Washburn, Watson, Woodworth-33.
The Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New
Jersey delegations, all of the Pennsylvania
and Massachusetts delegations, except Bufing
ton and Grow, would not vote even in favor of
this motion. These delegations, in fact, were
at the bottom of the difficulty, during all the
proceedings.
5. The next question was on recommitment.
Mr.. ZollicoAer Ok. N.Y. moved call of the
House. Out of order. Mr.. Campbell, of Pa,
| TX. N.Y. moved an adjournment. Lost. Mr.
Campbell, Of Ohio moved to lay on the table
out of order-then to postpone inde6ntey-out
Of order-.then, to postpone till lst of March
next-out of order.
Mr.. Meacham having again announced that
he did not wish the bill recommitted, the ques-
ton was taken, and the House refused to re-
commit-yeas IS, nays 81.
Banks men voting nay-Billinghur Bliss,
Day, Dodd, Flagler, Giddings, Granger, Grow,
Horton of N. Y, Hughston, Knowlton, Mace,
McCarty, Meacham, Mott, Nichols, Perry,
Spinner, Wade, Elihu B. Washburne, 1. Wash
burn, and Watson-22.
6. The House had now reached the Native
American amendment of Humphrey Marshall.
The minority would rather smother the bill
than vote upon ia direct vote must be pre-
vented. 1t was yet early, and the House had
nothing to do but dispose of the bill.
Motion to adjourn, by Davis TX. n.y. of
Maryland-tellers demanded by Walker tx.
NJ of Alabama-yeas and nays demanded by
Sage TX. N.Y. of New York-motion with
drawn-motion to reconsider the vote against
recommitment, by McCarty of New York
motion to lay this on table, by Jones of Ten
nessee-moton to adjourn until Monday re-
iected-motion to adjourn, by Gilbert of New
York-Campbell of Ohio wished to make a
report-motion to adjourn, distinction to ad-
journ over, by Edwards *. N.Y. of New York,
ruled out of order-motion by same to adjourn
till Saturday, lost--Campbell of Ohio wished
to take from Speakers table - objection
made-motion to adjourn, by Sage, lost-yeas
and nays ordered on motion to lay on table the
motion to reconsider the vote on recommit-
ment-call of the House moved by Campbell
of Ohio-out of order-motion to adjourn, by
Edwards TX. N.Y. of New York, lost-2s yeas,
62 nays. House reduced below a quorum
long talk about the right to order call of the
| House.
This is a specimen of the kind of tactics
used to defeat an honest bill, of some import
lance to the People of the District-tactics
never before resorted to, except by Slavehold-
ers to carry some of their peculiar interests, or
by Free State Men, to restrain some enormous
aggression of the Slave Power. In this case,
they were resorted to by Southern and North
ern Know Nothings and certain Republicans,
to prevent fair expression of the opinion of
the House on a wanton proposition to intro
duce Native Americanism in an honest Election