True American. [volume] (Steubenville [Ohio]) 1855-1861, 1856-02-27


Of Speaker by plurality vote.
(. ! came into Congress, inexperienced in
legislative duties, in ls49. when there
was similar contest, the prominent can
didates being Messrs. Winthrop and
Cobb, The Free Soil party was repre-
sented by, Messrs. Giddings, WilmOt,
Root, and some six others, who he Id the
balance Of power. After a protracted
struggle, many efforts were made 10 adopt
a plurality rule. Although a supporter
Of Mr.. Winthgop, united with the Free
Soil men on this question, and uniformly
voted against In agreeing with them in
the arguments which they presented, that
il was Of doubtful constiiutionality, and a
departure from The uniform usage since
the organization Of the Government, of
hazardous tendency. Itwas finally adopt
ed, and the result was that a House, a
majority Of which was elected as advo-
Gates Of the "Wilmot proviso," refused to
apply the restriction to the Territories
acquired from Mexico, which, by the laws
of that Government, had been previously
dedicated to free institutions, and closed
its legislation on the slavery question, by
the enactment'of the fugitive slave law,
scithOut securing trial by jury, as rec
ommendedby Mr.. Clay and the compro-
mise committee of the Senate. .u
On one occasion during the contest re-
ferred to, when the plurality resolution
was before the House, Mr.. Giddings pro-
posed the following substitute, in the pro.
priety Of which fully concured:
"Whereas, the election of the Speaker
of this body is one of the highest and most
important duties incumbent upon its mem.
bers; and whereas, also, by common con.
sent Of every House of Representatives
since the adoption of the Constitution, a
majority Of all the votes has been regard.
ed as necessary to a choice of that Off
Ger; and whereas the freedom of debate
has ever been regarded as one OF the safe
guards of American liberty: Therefore,
"ResolVed, That a change in such elec-
ton so as to elect Speaker; by plural
ity of votes, while the minority are not
permitted to discuss the propriety or con-
slitutionality of such change, will be op.
pressive in operation, of dangerous ten
dency, and ought not to be adopted"
During The first week of this session,
when it was suggested TO me BY the
friends who kindly supported me for the
Speakers chair, that plurality reso-
luton would insure success, again avow-
cd my opposition to it.
Without celebrating on The subject, my
reasons for voting against it now l will
state (: ...
]. That am not fully satisfied thai
it is not an infraction of the spirit Of the
Constitution.
2. That it is an abandonment of uni
form usage, which did not, in ls49, ant
fear would not now, promote the sue
cess Of the principles which | advocate
8. Because have reason 10 apprehen'
that its adoption at this time will resul
in giving the organization of the Hous
to the friends OF the Nebraska act.
4. Because, aside frcm principle, ! an
not disposed to sluhify my past recor
until Tam satisfied it is wrong; certain
ly not until the public in,eres. demand
such sacrifice, and a change OF my pc
siiion would settle the "vexed question.
| ! give these reasons briefly now, from
a regard to those who have reques.e
them in respectful terms. 70 the cutsi
ders here Who may have "jobs' in view
and to The editors elsewhere, who hav
denounced me as "traitor" to the prin
ciple l have always advocated, and s,iI
adhere 10, Ibid Defiance! l am neithe
to be I'D as the puppet of the former, no
TO be driven under the lash of the latte,
Very ytruly yours, &C.,
LEWIS D. CAMPBELL.
Now wee would respectfully ask tn
Republican and all concerned, to compar
the course Of Hon. L. D. Campbell, wit
that of Hon. Joshua 4. Giddings-th
very personi6cation of the Republican
political creed--in ls49 and in 1856, up
on the same question, the plurality rule
sworn 10 actin accordance with their con
victions Of constitutional law, and theI
decide which Of the two gentlemen ha
been the consist ent Statesman.
There is nethiDg invidious intended b,
the comp parison we have Instituted. MI
Giddings may have had reasons entitel,
satisfactory to his own mind for thus stul
tifying his 'antecedents' upon this ques
ton. Physiologists say that in sever
years The physical system undergoes