Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-01-14
WASHINGTON NEWS AND GOSSIP.


Of comment upon the interesting proceedings
in the House, which occurred therein on Sat-
urday last Otherwise, the afternoon being
very stormy, the delay necessary to enable us
to explain properly what was then and there
going on, would have thrown the delivery of
thousands of copies of the Star far into the
night. On the day before, the House had, by
vote, signi6ed its desire that the several can
didates tor the Speakership should reply to
the following questions, addressed by Mr..
zollicoffer, originally, to Mr.. Richardson,
only,) viz:
L. cam right in supposing that the gen.
tleman from Illinois Mr.. Richardson regards
the Kansas-Nebraska bill as promotive of the
formation of free States in the Territories of
Kansas and Nebraska"
2. "Am 1 right in supposing that he ad
vocates the constitutiOnality of the Wilmet
proviso? that in 1850 he opposed its applica-
tion to the territories acquired from Mexico
only upon the ground that it was unnecessary,
inasmuch as the Mexican local laws in those
territories already abolished slavery, which
ought to be sufficient for all free soil men;
and that he committed himself to the position
that if territorial bills, silent upon the sub.
ject of slavery, land leaving the Mexican
laws to operate were defeated, he would vote
for bills with the Wilmot proviso in them9"
3. "Am l right in supposing that his
theory is that the Constitution CT the United
States does not carry slavery to, and protect
it in, the Territories of the United States ?"
4. "That in the territory acquired from
France, Including Kansas and Nebraska the
Missouri restriction was necessary to make the
territory free, because slavery existed there
Inr tl.A zHA a.
but that the anSas-Nebraska bill, which re-
peals that restriction, but neither legislates
slavery into those Territories nor excludes il
therefrom, in his opinion, leaves those Terri
tories without either local or constitutional law
protecting slavery. and that, therefore, the
massachusetts bill promotes the formation
of free States in Kansas and Nebraska"
After much unnecessary legislative pull
ing and hauling, amounting to nothing except
procrastinating the time at which the answers
were given, Though all three candidates had
previously expressed perfect willingness to
reply to them frankly and fully,) Messrs.
Richardson, Banks, and Fuller, each gave
distinct and unmistakable explanations Of their
several positions on the mooted points. They
were all, We take It, eminently satisfactory to
their respective supporters.
Mr.. Richardson, ever since his entrance into
Congress, has been an svowed advocate of the
constitutional rights of the whole of the States,
including those of the South; or under exist
ing circumstances, he would not be the Dem
ocratis candidate for the Speakership. Our
space will not permit US to spread before the
Stars readers their several replies. So we
must content ourself with explaining their
tenor in this running commentary. As before
remarked, the reply of Mr.. Richardson gave
his supporters, one and all, perfect satisfaction,
because it not only proved that his senti-
ments are in direct accordance with the doc
trine of the caucus resolution On which he
was nominated, but it embraced powerful ar
gument in favor of the wisdom, patriotism, and
constitution-conservingp principle of the caucus
resolution on which his party may face any
amount and character of opposition in the ap-
preaching Presidential election, in the South,
North, East, or West.
We presume that the reply of Mr. Fuller
also satisfied all that gentleman's supporters
as, after his previous declarations in the hall
(which were such as to induce a number of
Southern members to cling to him. no other
answer than that which he gave was to have
been expected from a straightforward, chival-
ric man. 1t proved, that though his previous
record had not been in accord with his decla-
rations upon the Nebraska-Kansas question
made some weeks ago, his change of senti-
ment On that subject was real and earnest,
and that he is acting in perfect good faith
toward his supporters for the Speakership
We presume that no Southern member can re-
quire more frank and satisfactory exposition
OF Mr. F.'s views upon the yexed question of
slavery than he gave, however unsatisfactory
to the majority of the members from the
South his subsequently declared views on
Know Nothingism may be.
Mr.. Banks declared his sentiments too,
equally emphatically, though by no means 50
frankly as did his rivals for the Speakership.
Allowing himself in favor of tho exclusion of
slavery from all the Territories of the United
States by legislation when that may be ne
cessary, he protested his devotion to the rights
OF the southern States under the constitution,
as readily as Mr.. Giddings ofton takes occa.
sion to do that same thing; and though he re-
Trained from explaining in SO many words
that his views of the rights of the southern
States under the constitution are precisely
what Mr. Giddings interprets them to be,
between his-Mr. G's-periodical infections
of his stereotyped slang wanging about ''hu-
man freedom, 'chains," "bonds, =" "fetters, -
dc.,) no one who heard him, doubted that he
meant to have it understood by the initiated
that he stood on all slavery questions precisely
where Mr.. Giddings might stand, and no
where else.
As Mr.. Giddings has SO often declared in The
Hail. SO, on Saturday, Mr.. Banks declared
that he believed that the Constitution of the
United States went to initiate-to lay the
foundation for-the establishment of shumar
freedom" every where which declaration wa,
direct and palpable contradiction of his pre