The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1856-07-14

$40 sssssa esm az -
in the resolution against Mr.. Guthrie. The
preamble thereto embodies an affidavit reflect
ing on certain officers, and this is the basis Of
the proposed enquiry. I'll
@ After further debate the resolution was
passed.
IL Ball Kenneth, Burnett, King and Cadwalla-
der were appointed the Committee.
! The consideration Of fine report Of the Com.
mittee relative to Brooks assault on Sumner,
was resumed.
Comins, of Mass, said he had heard no
termsof condemnation of the assault which
did injustice to the perpetrator. In contem-
plating the report of the Committed and the
issue involved, all local, political personal feel
ings sank into insignificance. He asked not
sympathy for Summer nor vindication of Mas
saehusetts, outimpiored every member who
loved peace, quiet and order, to join as one
man and roll back the tide of ruftian violence
which was becoming prominent, prevalent and
arrogant. TIE murderouS blow which felled
Simmer fell not on Massachusetts more than
any other State. The slave power. having
failed to sustain itself in intellectual conflict,
resorted to brute force, and, with bludgeon,
beat freedom over the head. The slave power,
has trampled the Constitution in the DUST
There is very little more for the gentleman
from Georgia to do than draw black lines
around it, and write the word "expunged"
across its face.
In speaking, Mr.. Comins alluded to the mis-
sion of Samuel Hoar to South Carolina.
Aiken interrupted, pronouncing, on his own
responsibility, one of Comins' statements false.
This produced some confusion.
Letcher rose to a question of order. That
what may have occurred in South Carolina
had nothing to do with the pending issue.
Houston likewise interrupted, saying the re-
marks Of Comins were irrelevant.
~aGiddings earnestly called him to order.
The speaker defined the rights of members
in debate, and requested them not to interrupt
Comns. VII rs
Letcher did not insist on his point Of order.
Comins resumed expressing his amazement
at the stern stolidity Of the Senate concerning
their privileges, at which deadly low was
armed In conclusion, he referred in com
mendation, to the remark of names Watson
Webb, that the outrage merited death on the
spot, to be administered by any one present
Could the friends Of Brooks object to his ex-
puls;on from the House?
Cobb Of Ca said he had hoped that no dis
position would have been evinced to avoid the
Issue as furnished by that assault That ii
>
slavery speech or sentiments was not founded
in truth nor supported by evidence Let the
question be met fairly. The testimony showed
that the assault was made in consequence Of a
personal insult offered to friend and kinsman
Of Brooks, and the indignity cast on the State
which Brooks in part represented. 1t was
stated by Summer, as reason given by Brooks
at the time Of the assault as to drawing black
lines around the Constitution as recommended
by Comins; he who was prepared for the dam
nable deed might do it. 1t was no Tart of his
duty and the invitation met no response in his
heart.
Comins said he alluded to the slave power
Cobb-contnuing his remarks-said he
raised his voice in behal Of the Constitution
planted himself ON its provisions, and called or
the gentlemen to enforce them. Then he ar
gued that this was not such question as jus
tilted the jurisdiction of the House The Con
stitution protected members only so far as was
necessary for legislative purposes. Beyond
this thew were on level with their hulnblest
constituents, and responsible for the libels
they might utter. With regard ~ Edmund
son and Keitt, whom a majority Of the Com
mittee proposed to censure, they were guilty
of no disorderly behavior, within the province
Of the House to punish. Neither was princi
pal nor accessory to the assault, because they
took no steps to prevent the preparation o.
the act or to inform Sumner of his danger
The Committee say that their neglect is repre-
hensible, thus in effect proposing to punish
men, who receiving confidential communica-
tons fail to become public informers.
Pennington remarked that if Orr insinuated
yesterday what was not broadly asserted, that
the object was to make political capital. it was
utterly unfounded, in fact, so far as be was
concerned, and therefore he gave it fiat denial
He argued in favor of supporting the princi
pies advanced by the report of the committee
saying he imputed to Brooks no murderouS
purpose, but in the eye Of the law the weapon
used was a murderoas one, and was welded
IN murderous manner.
Foster said he had no personal acquaintance
with either Sumner or Brooks, hence he could
argue the subject dispassionately. He con
tended it was as clear to him as the sun il
heavens that the House, under the constitu
ton, has no jurisdiction in the premises HI
condemned the infammatory appeals resorteC
70 in the case.
Adjourned