The daily union., 1856-01-19

mans remarks he IMr GiDpiNosl bad stated that the
democratic party had, in lSi9 adopted ia caucus the
plurality rule The truth OF the matter simply this
that the plurality rule adopted ia caucus by the whg
party, when II reported by committee OF conference
OF the two parties but IL rejected in the democratic
caucus by decided majority and that afterwards Il was
offered IN the House by member Of the democratic party
notwithstanding is rejection in their caucus and was
adopted by the votes principally Of the whg party with
minority Of the democratic party II the gentleman would
examine the record he would lind that majority OF the
democratic members Of the House in Si9 voted against
the adoption Of the plurality rule aud would find also that
there no one more denuncaory and violent in his o
position TO that rule than the gentleman himself lie Mr.
had on that occasion offered substitute to the rule
which, In substance, declared that il wrong ia prnc
Pile dangerous in tendency and ought be adopted
One word in reference the responsibility for the dsor
ganization of the House. aud he (Alr o. done. The
record of the House for the last few days exhibited this
fact TO the eountrylbat the republican party, they
termed themselves, had il in their power place in the
Speakers chara member of their party who had the
commencement OF the session received the highest number
of the of that party for that position The resou
ton offered by the gentleman from Iowa Mr. TnoRIsaros
declaring Mr. CAMPnELL to be Speaker Of the House had
ceved be believed the Of fifty members OF the House
There voting against that resolution 80 members of
the so-caed republican partyhtytwo Of those who have
heretofore been casting their for the honorable gen
teman from Massachusetts, Mr. BANKS and il they had
voted for il instead of against it, the resolution would
have been adopted, and Mr. CAMPBELL would have been
elected Speaker of the House These gentlemen there
fore placed themselves before the country this position
that they content to organize the House with
member Of their own pary-a member who the choice
OF plurality Of that party at the commencement of the
sessonnay further they prefer that Congress should
main disorganzed and the government to go
with its operations, than they should place OF their
party having the confidence Of their party agreeing
with them in principle and capable of dscharging the
duties of the office in the Speakers chair. Such is
the record of this party. Their issue is Mr.. BANKS
and dsorganzaton Ia preference 10 elecng presiding
officer member of their party to whom they have
urged personal or political objection The responsible
ity rested upon them and they must justify their position
before the country 1t not necessary and he would
not go into discussion in reference to the plurality rule
lie would only point the gentleman from Ohio to his vote
against that rule in ls49. He [Mr. GiDDNGsl was
in favor Of it, because he the recipient of the benefits
of 1T but he Mr C) would not vote for it 1t
would receive his when its operation would inevitably
be place in the Speakers chair the gentleman from Mas
saehusetts Mr. BANKS j and he believed such the de-
termination of majority Of the House If gentlemen
were holding supporting Mr. BANKS, under the impress
sion that the plurality rule would be finally adopted and
that gentleman elected he gavet his opinion that they
were deeeyng themselves II they preferred BAsKs and
disorganzation 10 one Of their own party and organ-
tpn let them stand fall upon the issue which they thus
make before the House and the country ...a
Mr. GIDDINGS had not stated that the members of the
democratic party in the House in 849 had voted for the
resouton he had only said that that party, acting
party not in the House. but in caucuses had in assoca
ton with another party, adopted the plurality rule
Mr. COBB, of Georgia. That is not correct statement
OF the facts have already stated them to the gentleman
from Ohio they occurred and every member of this
House who member at that time and in that caucus
will bear in repeating the refutaon of the charge
made by the gentleman.
Mr. GIDDINGS had only referred to what had been
member, Mr. Stanton and the gentleman from Georgia
mr. Conn had then in silence and heard that gentle
declare that it had been agreed upon by his party
and he did not deny it, did any member of his party
deny it, He asked that gentleman whether he was
prepared do what he prepared to do thep He
did wish to arraigu the gentleman his party but
when they attempted to arraign his Mr. Gs party they
said let the record be referred to- lie here read the fol-
lowing
'Mr. SrASros, OF Tennessee aud said that he de-
sired to proposition to the House. He presumed
that under the rule which had been adopted would be
in order debate it, He would however, be permitted
on the part the committee appointed by the wg
to confer with similar committee appointed by the demo-
Here, said Mr. e., the gentleman was interrupted; and
turning over few pages further he continued reading
"The House had reached the contingency contcm-
plated in the proposition OF Mr. Stanton 1t had exhausted
the three votings therein provided for without resu and
bad arrived at that point where in men of the
entered into between the two parties, Speaker to be
elected by plurality VOTE" rtHs sa.sarF
He called the attention Of the House 10 the fact that the
democratic party then acting party had agreed with
the whig party acting party that the plurality rule
should be adopted.
Mr.. MLLS0N of Virginia. desired to say that he was
member Of that Congress and attended the democratic eau
and he recoected distinctly that he opposed the pu
ray resolution when It offered by Mr. Stanton in the
caucus and he had not the slightest impression upon his
mind that il adopted by the caucus -. T.
| Mr. GlDDINGS did not want recollection; he had the
record, aud he pin upon the democratic party
Mr. COBB OF Georgia desired simply say in reference
to the construction which the gentleman from Ohio placed
upon the language of Mr. Stanonand he said ID In the
hearing OF tbe gentleman and Of the Housethat there
could not be found single member Of the 3lst Con-
gress who would rise and say that he believed, that
time that Mr. Stanton intended say before the House
that the democratic party bad adopted the resolution in
their Ii well known then, IL was
known now and had been stated by his friend from
Virginia and himself that IL had been rejected by the
democratic The construction which the gem
teman from Ohio sought put upon the remarks
Of Mr.. STANTON was the only foundation which he
had for the charge be made against the democratic
party, and he Mr.. GmDRssl knew IL he recollected
what occurred that time that IL well understood IN
the House that the democratic party had rejected It, Did
the gentleman, any member OF the House suppose that
II the democratic party had adopted that reEQuon in
Gus and then when II beore the House only some
twenty members Of that party had voted for H. and
whemng majority against IT, such an evidence Of
bad faith would have passed by unnotcedP Could they
believe that the county would have for moment
tanned Mr. Stanton In bis on that the democratic
had adopted the resolution yet when they came
into the House reefourihs fourfhs Of them had re-
corded their votes against it2 y.
Mr.. EDMUNDSON of Virginia said that when any gen
emau asserted that the democratic party then
agreed TO adopt The plurality rule he asserted that which
not true.
Mr.. ORR; Of South Carolina was present NJ that time
aud such resolution that referred to by the gentleman
FROM Ohio adopted by the democratic caucus, ethics
directly ar iadirectly, /
Mr. COBB OF Georgia merely wished 20 state that from
the remarks Of Mr. Stanton IL would be that he In
tended say that the resolution had been adopted In The
whg caucus and had been reported the democratic
Gus by Its committee appointed TO confer with similar
committee OF the whg party but be intended
ort before the House did any member so understand
him at that time that the democratic party had adopted
the resolution iu caucus
Mr. FULLER, OF Maine was one Of the few democratic
WI at tho