Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1858-05-06
The Perfdy Complete!


noon, which are below, it will be seen tina
the English substitute has passed, and wha
is huIniliating In the extreme is the fac
that the Ohio Democrats who avowed them
selves on the Crittenden Montgomery
amendment as Anti-Lecompton, have, il
body, followed the leader in this perhdy
back to the ranks of their slavery allies
The Democratic representation of Ohio II
Congress now have recorded themselves
opposed to giving the people of Kansa:
the right to vote on the Lecompton Con
siitution. In the history of Ohio politics
there never has been so base desertior
of principle as this. Mr.. Cox may appea
10 heaven until he is hoarse as to the recti
tude of his conduct, but the people will
Judge for themselves. Besides this betray.
al of their constituents, there is meanel
feature in the violation of the pledge made
by these men to adhere to the Crttenden'
Montgomery amendment and to stand by
the noble band of Republicans and South
Americans. who were associated with them
in that vote.
The Democrats, who having voted for
the Crittenden-M Montgomery amendments,
have now stultifed themselves by voting
for the English substitute are ENGLISH
and FOLEY, of Indiana; OWEN, oi
Penn; PENDLETON, GROESBECK,
HALL, LAWRENCE and COX, of
| Ohio.
Those Democrats who did not change
from their former vote, are Mortis, Harris,
Shaw, Smith and Marshall, of Illinois
Adrain, of N. j.; Clark and Haskin of N.
York; Hickman and Chapman, of Pa.
On the former the following Democrats
voted for Crittenden- Montgomery amend
ments, to wit :-McKibben, of CAL; Davis,
of Ind; Montgomery, of Pa; also Davis,
South American, of Maryland. These
names do not appear in the present vote,
but there may be errors to be corrected.
The South Americans who have not de-
serted, are Ricaud and Harris, of Mary
land; and Gilmer, of N. C..
Illinois Democrats stood firm; Indiana
and Ohio furnished the treason, and the
people will bury the traitors.
WAsHINGToN, April 80.
HoUsE-Mr. Campbell replied that he
did not make the assertion with reference
to the gent asking Mr.. Groesbeck whether
he understood his bill as submitting the
Constitution.
Mr.. Owen Jones, of Pa, remarked that
he had never given pledge to Mr.. Camp
bell, or to any one else.
Mr.. Campbell asked whether he did not
meet with what was known as Anti-Le-
compton Democrats, or whether or not
committee was appointed with power to
represent and speak for them to another
body.
Mr.. j. replied that he met with them on
certain occasions with certain Democrats,
but no committee of that kind was appoint
ed or authorized to pledge his vote on that
subject.
Mr.. CAMPBELL asked him whether the
Constitution was to be submitted.
Mr. Jones replied that he was willing to
let the people construe that for themselves.
daughter.
Mr.. Bonhaw moved the previous ques-
ton.
Mr.. Grow moved, but unsuccessfully, a
call of the House.
Mr.. Haskin, of New York, obtained con-
sent to make few remarks. He said that
Mr.. Cox at certain time was not only OPP
posed to the Lecompton Constitution, but
on Monday last, late in the afternoon, came
to his desk and read a letter which he had
written TO the Ohio Statesman, denouncing
the report of the Committee of Conference
as the most infamous that could be made,
and denouncing the chairman for having
made such report.
Mr.. Cox, earnestly-That is not true.
Mr.. Haskin-I can prove it by gent
from Illinois-Mr. Harris.
Mr.. Cox..I can furnish the letter.
Cries of "order."
The Speaker requested the gentlemen to
take theirs seats.
Mr.. Florence, of Pa, called Mr.. Haskins
to order
Mr.. Houston, of Ala, interposed, saving
the remarks of Mr.. Haskins were irrelevant
and he must confne himself to the pending
measure.
There was much confusion and excite
ment during these Proceedings.
The Speaker reminded Mr.. Haskins that
his remarks were assuming personal
character. He could give reasons for or
against the bill, but not indulge in person
alities.
Mr.. Haskins said be was simply giving
facts in connection with Lecompton frauds
and could prove what he had stated
Twenty-three Democrats started out against
the Senate bill, aad only twelve are left
jHst equal to the opposition. The gentle
man from Ohio had seen new light, and he
asked him to give it to the country.
Mr.. Cox replied that he had stated yes
lerday that his first impression was against
the conference report, and now repeated
that itdid not entirely meet his views. In
mis- letter to the Ohio Statesman, he gave
his opinion and objections. At that time
his first impression was against the report,
because he thought it discriminating
.gainst free and in favor of slave State.
He consulted with Governor Walker, and
hearing from him that next fall Kansas will
nave population sufficient, under the gen.
raj ratio for a member of Congress, he
ook the report as the best he could get
rhe gentleman from New York need not
nsinuate that he was Judas. That gen.
leman knew full well that no one from
he Administration or any other source had
lared to approach him on the subject
Laug liter from the Republican side. He
lad acted with an honest mind and pure /,
eart for himself, and any man who insinu-
ted to the contrary was not worthy of a
lace on this floor. nor would be be if be j