The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1857-12-24
THE WASHINGTON UNION.

had lint IN his opinon not take the course
indicated by the resolution without violating the prin
cinles oflaN
Mr. CoLFAx, of Indiana, declared that the self-re
ect of the American Congress the representatives
American people demanded this investigation. IL was
said that the resolution of an extraordinary char
acer but it had been devised TO meet an extraordinary
state Of affairs without precedent in the history OF the
Union. Did they not know that the authority OF the
United States openly dehed and trampled under foot
and United States officers compelled to leave that Terri
tory and fee for their livesf
Mr. STEPHENS, OF Georgia. remarklng tha' ne mad no
objection to the passage OF the resolution as was still
entertained by the Chair but that he did not think that
it involved question of privilege, moved the previous
question.
The previous question receiving second ana the main
question being ordered,
Mr. KEITr, of South Carolina, moved that the reso-
luton be laid on the table.
Mr.. BANKS asked what had been done with the last
proposition OF the gentleman from Arkansas
The SPEAKER stated that he had ruled II out OF
order the ground that it was not question OF priv
lege.
The motion to lay the resolution ON the table was then
lost-yeas IL nays llSand the resolution agreed TO-
The question recurring upon the adoption OF the pre-
amble,
Mr. MILSON of Virginia, suggested that It be amend
ed SO TO read as follows
Whereas it appears from the message OF the President
that many persons in the Territory of Utah are in state
of rebellion, and whereas 1t appears that john BERN
nlsEL the delegate from that Territory may be mpii-
~ =
Mr.. WARREN Icannot accept such proposition
must insist upon the previous question.
The previous question seconded the main question
ordered, and the preamble adopted lO7, nays TO-
as follows
YEAS Messrs Abbott Adrain ALL Anderson Ar
mold, Atkins Avery, Bennett Bishop Blair Bowie, Buff
hngton, Burnett Burns, Chapman Clark OF Conncctl-
cut, Clark of Missouri, Clay, Clemens, Cobb, Clark
b. Cochrne Of New York, John Cochane OF New York,
Cockerill, Coliax Cox, cragin, Craig Of Missouri,
Crawford, Curtis, Damrell, Davidson, Davis OF lndi-
ana Davis of Mississippi, Dean, Dewart, Dick Ell
liott English Eustis, Foley, GartIeii uhhs oreeh-
wood, Gregg, Hatch, Hawkins, Hopkins Houston,
Hughes Huyler jackson, Jenkins, Jones OF Tennessee
j. Clancy Jones, Owen Jones Of Pennsylvania kett ke
logg Kelsey Kilgore, Kunkel OF Pennsylvania Letcher
Marshall of illinois, Mason Maynard Miller MOORE Nor
gan, Morris OF Illinois, Niback, Parker Peyton Phelps
Phillips, Puryiance, Ready, Reagan, Reilly hitchle
Roberts, Royce, Ruin, Russell, Scales, Scott Seward
Shaw of North Carolina, Smith OF Illinois, smith OF Vr
gnia Stallworth Stevenson Stewart OF Maryland stew
of Pennsylvania Talbot, Thayer Irippe Wade Ward
Warren, Washburne of Illinois, Watkins. White, White
ly Wilson, Woodson. Wortendyke, Wright OF Georgia.
and Wright of Iennessee-lO7
NAYS essrs. Andrews Banks Barksdae, Billing
hurst Bliss, Bocock, Boyce, Branch Bryan Burlingame
Burroughs Campbell, Case, Caskie Chahee, Cawson
Comins Craige of North Carolina, Curry Davis of Mary
land, Davis of Massachusetts,, Davis OF Iowa. Dawes
Dodd, Dowdell Edmundson Florence, Foster, Giddings
Gilman Goode Granger Groesbeck, Grow, Hall OF Mas
sachsetts, Harlan Harris Of Illinois, Haskin Hill Hoard
Horton, Howard, Jewett Knapp Letter, Loveoy
son, Morrill,, Morris of Pennsylvania, Morse of New
York. Mott, Nichols, Pendlcton Petit, Potter Powell
Qtman, Robbins, sandidge, Savage, Sherman OF Ohio
Sherman of New York. Spinner, Stanton, Taylor of
Louisiana Thompson, Tompkins, Underwood, Walbridge
Walton and Washburn of Wisconsin--76.
Mr. KFITvr Of South Carolina moved that the vote
Inv which the preamble was adopted he reconsdered
His objections 10 n crew out If the basis upon which IL
,vos founded n charged that from the nrocamation of
Briobam Younp there was rebellion IN the Territory of
IItab He knew nothing of that nrocIamation and he
did not apnrebepd that there was member there who
had an authenticated conv If n The President had not
d n, b ,essae that There WINS rebellion and was the
Honse In affirm Il mon mere newspaper statementsY
Mr. WARREN remarked that the gentleman had
stated that the only evidence that thew had of the proc
Iamat;on was floating nbout m the newspapers He
wonM refer him To the message o the President and ask
him IN saw cmphatjcallv whether Il did not s,y So
Mr. KEITH rened Inv asking whether the President
had not sent regiment or two to Utah II he had be-
leyed flat BRIGHAM Young intended to maintain his au
,ht nv, 6rce should he have sent s;pole reoin,ent
or t,ya The President did not come 10 them for nm in
Of force in order 10 test whether or not Brigham
Young intended to maintain his authority by force. If
he had believed that that proclamation was ior war; why
had he not said so in his messenger lie would so asep
further and suppose that there was repenon there In
his opinion wonid be rebellion against the constituted
authorities, and they were asked lot ahyhg IL would
be Tor troops 10 suppress H. ours was representative
government and representation was essential TO the very
structure and organization OF the government
Mr. SEWARD, OF Georgia, asked the gentleman TO
show him under what provision OF tne constitution de
eGate rom a. lerri.ofy neio ms sea' oh INC nooi,
Mr.. KEITT replied that when he came to that point
he nj.