Washington telegraph., 1856-05-28

to the extension of slavery had a larg,
majority, and asked them why they die
: not elect their man? He surmised tha
the difficulty probably grew out of unset
tied questions as to how tie committee:
should be formed. He asked, Nif the ma
jority cannot organize the House, who car
do it, and how can it be done ?" HI
could not ssvote for the man who entertain,
the principles of that party ;sbut he said
al want to see an organization, and hone
it will soon be effected"
| Subsequently there were various PROPOSE
tions made to institute the plurality rule
They failed, by dint of the united votes o.
National Americans and Democrats, with q
few Republicans who were opposed to Mr.
Banks. This brought about discussion
among members as to what would be the eff.
feet of that rule. The question was also
discussed in the newspapers And what
was the public opinion in tie House and
out of the House? What was the opinion
of Southern men, Democrats, Americans,
and Republicans? Why. that if the plu-
rality rule was adopted Mr. Banks would be
elected Speaker, Under these circum.
stances. my colleague on the I'd of Februa-
ry. renewed the proposition to adopt the
plurality rule. He seems tohave solved. in
his own mind. the question, WHO can do
at. and hoa0 can it be done,,' His propo-
sition was carried by republican votes and
those of a few Democrats, te wit: Messrs.
Barclay, Clingman, Herbert. Jewett Hick-
/ oil
the National Americans and he great body
of Democrats voting against it.
My colleague makes the argument that
the half dozen national Americans wbo un-
der his plurality rule, voted for Mr. Fuller,
are alone responsible for MI Banks elec-
ton. because they had the day before, voted
voluntarily for Mr.. Aiken. 1t was we'll
known that, while they were very willing, if
left to act for themselves. to vote for Dem
ocrat, they were not willing to do 50 under
compulsion. They had voted in body, at
different times, for more than one Democrat,
and were willing TO continue to do so; but
they resisted the plurality rule After my
colleague moved the plurality rule, and be-
fore the vote was taken upon ii, Mr.. Car
lille, National American. offered the follow
ing resolution as substitute for my col
leagues proposition
"Resokred, That the Hon. Vim. Aiken,
a Representative from the State of S. Caro-
lima, be, and he is hereby declared Speaker
of the Thirty Fourth Congress
My colleague objected; and the previous
question demanded also by my colleaguc)
having been seconded, the resolution could
not be acted upon. He seemed resolved to
very obnoxious. Having succeeded in this,
the candidate of the Democratic party (Mr.
Orr immediately withdrew in favor of Mr..
Aiken; apparently with view. if not ex-
pressly to give the proposed test an air of
Democratic pre-argument, (which was, of
course, distaSteful to Americans, who in a
spirit of liberality. had already yielded ev-
erything but principle,) at least with a view
of forcing direct test between Aiken and
Banks. under the plurality rule. And this
too, when Democrats had refused to vote for
an American under any circumstances
Mr.. Smith, of Tennessee If my col
league will allow me to interrupt him for a
moment, desire to ask him these questions:
Did not sufficient number of Americans
vote for the gentleman from South Carroll
ma, Mr.. Aiken, the Gay before, to have
elected him on the first vote under the plu-
rality; and whether. if the same members
of the American party who voted for Gov
ernor Aiken on the day before had voted
for him on the day the election took place,
it would not have elected him
Mr. Zollicofer 1t is true that the Am
erican party had voted for Gov Aiken vol
unfairly; but they had not voted for him
under the circumstances which existed when
the election took place. They had not vo-
ted for him when the candidate of the De-
mocratic party had withdrawn. They had
not voted him when the Democratic party
had united with the Republicans in forcing
on us the plurality rule. And sir. this union
took place after the gentleman from Geor-
g;a, (Mr. Trippe,) member Of the Amer
lean party had stated that that party would
not vote on compulsion.
Mr. Smith My colleague did not an
swer as to whether. if the same members of
the American party who voted for Mr.. Al
ken the day before had voted for him on
the day of the election, he would not now
have been Speaker of this House.
Mr.. Zollicofer. As the whole body OF
Americans did vote for Governor Aiken the
day before, and did not elect him. how does
it appear that they could have elected him
And how is it that they did not elect him
What we're the Democrats doing then
Mr.. Smith. If my colleague will allow
me to ask him these question, will not
take up his time further. Did not the gen.
tlemen from New York, (Messrs- Whitney,
Walk and Bayard Clark,l and the gentle
men from Pennsylvania, (Messrs. Broom
and Fuller vote for Aiken; and if they had
voted for him on Saturday would he not
have been elected? and whether they did
not vote against him that day?
Mr.. Zollicoffer. The records show how
the gentleman Voted cannot tell whether
the whole American vote would have elect
ed Mr.. Aiken, unless I knew how many
Democratic votes would have been cast In
that event. But my colleague should not