The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1858-06-09
Speech Of the Hon. JOHN A. GII1MER,
or NORTH CAROLINA,
In the House Of Representatives, MAY - 1858

The H0sse being in committee OF the whole
on the state OF the Unon-Mr Giimer said
Mr.. Chairman: desire to say 4 few words
in reply to the speech made BY my colleague
lMr. Shaw on the Goth OF April last, and
during nv absence. regret that he is not
here this evening but feel compelled to
proceed with what have TO say in reply to
that extraordinary speech, and TO do so even
in his absence. feel justified in doing so,
for, on last Saturday, when | was prepared to
70 on, finding that he was not present
desisted, but gave notice of my intention TO
speak at the earliest opportunity. That re
mark was published in the papers this morn,
ing, aud therefore his absence is no fault OF
mine.
Mr.. Chairman, think that that speech
was an unfair one unjust, untrue, preyarica-
ting, and unworthy the gentleman who made
it. have read it over, and have read it
carefully. | have looked to see in 1t the
views Of statesman. have looked to see
in it fair dealing. Yet. sir. am troubled
70 give 10 it the character which IT deserves.
IL were this evening called on as a witness
in court to tell what thought was its char
acter, ny answer would be like that Of
witness examined in respect to the character
q
knew her general character, said, f." / think
do think that do know her general charac-
ter. | know il well."--' Please go on, then.
and tell what il is :" Yes, sir, know her
general character, and it is generally believ-
Ell in the neighborhood where she resides
that she is woman unworthy OF common
sense, and guilty of fits" lLaughter.l
NV colleague waited from the S0th Of
March to the Goth Of April TO reply to me,
and in commencing his remarks he made an
apology that he could not sooner get the floor.
conceive there was no extraordinary ankle
" on the part of my colleague to reply, or he
could have done 80 time and again before the
day he spoke. NV excellent friend from
Virginia, Mr.. Letcher,l portion of nv
speech being reply to his report on the
question Of population in the Territory Of
Kansas, remained and very easily got an OPP
portunity to reply to what had said in rela-
tion to his report. He remained and made
an argument which ! think, as things now
stand, he viii hardly stand up TO. He un-
dertook 10 insist before this House and the
country, that there was no doubt but that in
Kansas there was the requisite population to
entitle her 10 admission IS a State into the
Union. Nobody on the other side Insists on
that now, nor indeed on either side Of the
House. Before. it was contended that Kan
sas had a sufficient population for State !;
but the English conference bill admits indi-
rectly, but substantially, that there is not
half population enough. And, sir, would
not have felt myself justified in giving the
vote | did for the compromise bill, we'll
knowing the want Of population, were it not
fnrf he fran Ell m that r.
rounded this extraordinary case, and the inn
pOrtanee Of getting rid of this national excite
meHt.
Nv colleague charges me with having de-
noanced the Green amendment, and then Of
having voted for it. He improperly charges
that maintained the same doctrine in the
North Carolina Senate in voting for Gov
Graham's bill and yethe comes forward aud
himself defends the views Of the Executive
on that very subject which this Green amend
inent was intended to cover and sanction.
How much verify is there in his charge when
we come TO examine it: Did nv colleague
ever vote 10 strike out the Green amend
lnent! j. that true: II j. not true. Did
the gentleman from Mississippi Mr.. Quit
nam move to strike ont the Green amend
saent: lie never did.
Mr.. DAVIS, Of Mississippi. When the bill
came from the Senate, General Quitman
moved 10 strike out the Green amendment :
and those Of u who believed with him voted
for il.
NJ. GiLSgR. all show that he did not
% it.
Mr. DAVIS. Of Mississippi. DO il.
NJ. GiLxER. II his amendment had been
drawn out in writing. as It ought to have
Deen, nothing about the Green amendment
would be in Il. Why did lie not move 10
strike H. Green amendment from the Senate
bill: Why did he m0se a substitute: II
there Wa purpose, bona ide, to get rid Of
the Green amendment, why was not a motion
made 10 stFise il from the Senate bill before
,he vote was tekea on the CrIttenlen. Mont
gomery amendment Did he not know that
Tie Green amendmeE; would have been voted
out, had he offered simply 70 strike il from
the Senate biili Every American would have
voted 70 strike il out. Most Of the Opposition
members would have voted to strike il out.
Would il not have gone out, then, il the mo-
lion had been properly made Why not, then,
do he thing IN PLAIN, simple manner, 50 ca
sily dols, saI which wog!l have brugght the
HOUSE 70 utEett NVte On klt p4eeH athsHu-
meat, AMI MT at the same time against the
cfitteajca bill; respectfully express ms
suspicion tia twas done in the wag in which
Il wis, that certain .eHtiemsu might indi.
rsetly get their vote seemingly against the
amendment, when ,hey knew that tie motion
epgld aut be carried or, il may be, because
they knew tat ii that Green amendment
went out. there were certain Free.S0il men
from the North 1ho would desert their ranks
Iallude 10 the northern gentlemen WIN refused
" vote Tor tie QIitman amendment. In fact
and inplaia English, the motion was % made
and the vote 80 taken, a. 10 afford mere
showing, as saspeet-oBe 10 behalf Of III,
southern wing. that they were opposed TO tht
(,reen arsnIFnenl. and far the northerY