New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-02-06
THE CONTEST FOR SPEAKER REVIEWED
Editorial Correspondence OF The n T. Trieun'; ,o~e
WASHINGTON, Monday, Feb 4, 1856.

Il
ya,,sr,, Correspondence Of The n Y. Tribune ~
WASHINGTON, Monday, Feb. 4, 1880.
Tho most extraordinary struggle on record for
the presiding officer of deliberative BODY closed
on Saturday night, and the House, alter nine weeks
of chaos, is to-day proceeding regularly win nS
business under the guidance OF Speaker IL
would have been difficult for any man IN his ano-
malous position TO do better than Mr.. Forney did
through these stormy nine weeks; but an ex-Clerk
has no authority, no means of enforcing his man.
dates save appeals TO the magnanmity OF disturb
ers and to the selfrespect of the House. aud these
weeks have witnessed appeals from the noor and
responses from the galleries which would better
have beftted the worst phases OF the French Kew
olution. There is a general feeling oil RELIEF ana
thspkfulness that the semi-anarchy is at an end.
And. since AN not quite well enough to attend at
the Capital this bitter-cold day, let me profier
some suggestions prompted by review OF tlas re-
markable contest.
A good many journals have seen tit to arraign
ME fsr the part l have taken in this contest.
have duly considered their suggestions but replied
TO no attacks. 1t seems that l may now explain
nv own position without harm to any one else. L
will take, therefore, the impeachment Of The
Indiana State Journal as type of the whole, and
let my answer to that serve for all the rest. The
Journal says:
"THE SpEAKERsHIP-Horace Greeley writes to
THE n. Y. TRIBUNE of Friday as follows in reference
to move made by Cumback of this State to Sc
cure Speaker:
Finally Cumback of Indiana If not entirely salts
fed the mischief accomplished, offered proposition to
ms Mr.. Mace but finally re-
oried that this preontory the deserton Of Mr. Banks
S y are eaTeeed to follow t All Well gentlemen you
break down the party which elected you but what them
"Mr. Cumback's course may not have been the
safest possible. All men don't soc the same thing IN
the some way But whether he acted for the best or
worst we are he acted honestly and with no pur.
rose of treachery to the party There IS no sort OF
doubt that Mr.. Greeley himself Is doing more 10
break down the party than any five men in Wash
ington His influence little guided by moderation,
and so often bent to absolute injustice does nothing
but harm. Men who have stood by Banks faithfully
for six weeks, without moments wayerng, should
be spared the mputaton of dishonesty when they sug-
gest some other way to get out of the difficulty than
that Mr.. Greeley approves Savage censures of what
is at worst Djudcious not dishonest conduct, does
nothing but harm; and such have been MIR. Greeieys
comments in every case in which Republican has
cho.en TO differ from him. We have doubt that his
Letters have created more ieeing, hardened indlf'
ference into absolute arrangement and widened the
breach between reeusants and the party more than
any other influence operating at the Capital We be.
lieye with him that the AntNebraska men should
stand by Banks to the last, but we can believe that
honest men may think otherwise. Mr.. Cumback and
Mr.. Bienton, both of whom have come IN for u share
of the autocrac editors ashings, "a true as Mr..
Greeley as honest and devoted to the Of Free
dom as he Is and far likely to do il real service
than he is if he persists in the be has so far
followed. If he owned the Republicans in Congress,
he could hardly be more imperous. Considering the
defeats that have 80 often followed his plans and
efforts be might by this time, think have acquired
a Wholesome distrust of his own infalibility"
The reader will judge whether my remarks
on Mr.. Cumback's proposition are truly character
lied as "savage censures, and whether they in
volve "the imputation of dishonesty" believe
Mr.. Cumback at heart as true man as there ia in
Congress, yet think he was Overpersuaded by
the magn influences surrounding him into making
a demonstration which his own calm Judgment
must dsapprove. His proposition, coming right
on the back of Mr.. ThoringtOn's to elect Mr..
Campbell, seemed to me to prophesy and to pro-
mote general decentralization and breaking up Of
the Anti-Nebraska party. AS such, / condemned
it, If were wrong in my inference, Let the pub
lie, with the whole case before them, condemn me.
Now, to the main question. am accused of
Savage censures" of every Republican who has
"chosen to differ from " me. deny the imputaton,
and say that | only condemned those who fell out
Of line pi& the Anti- Nebraska party. So long as
there was no nominated candidate of that party for
Speaker maintained the full and equal right of
every Member to vote for any Anti-Nebraska man
he may have preferred or deemed available. Then
Mr.. Cumback or Dir. Brenton was at perfect liberty
to move any sort of resolution, propose any candi-
date, or drop any one already in nomination. But
at length a nominating caucus was called-(and the
impulse to it came from Indiana "a large majority
Of the Anti-Nebraska Members attended it-and
Mr.. Banks was there nominated for Speaker by
a very decisive vote Now, it seemed 10 me that
the case was bravely altered-that, unless repealed
By conviction that the candidate 80 nominated
was incompetent or unworthy, every Ant-Nebraska
Member was bound to support Mr. Banks heartily,
steadily constantly in the House, until another
caucus, duly called and held, should have decided
that the welfare Of the common cause required
concentration on some other man. Am / right or
wrong in this position If right, then the move
n ents OF Messrs ThOringtOn, Brenton and Cumback
were wrOng-not necessarily wrong in purpose,
but inconsistent with fidelity to their brethren who
had united in the nomination of Mr. Banks, and
who still adhered to it. trust they did not see the
matter in this light, but can see it in no other.
Their differing from" me, then, was OF no sort OF
consequence; aud my savage censures' would