The Washington union., 1858-03-05

Mr. BURNETT of Kentucky, hoped the subject would
not be postponed IL was due to the member against
whom the imputation s been made that be should have
hearing and the question be disposed of in
ner The charge of the gentleman from New York had
been published in the newspapers throughout the
try Comments had been made upon preudicia to the
gentleman from Ohio, and it right that he should
have a final disposition Of u. He had no doubt from
the in his possession, that the change basees
and il he give his opinion he should say that IL
was not only baseless but contemplate any that could
be made The postponement would do the gentleman
implicated great injustice.
Mr. MARSHALL sal! nothing was further from his in
tention than by his motion TO do additional injustice TO
Mr. BURNS His only object TO dispose of the ques
ton in some way so ha thsy could proceed to the con
siereton OF the army bill Since he understood that
there desire the part of Mr. BURNS that there
should be investigation he would Withdraw his mo
tion for a postponement
Mr. BURNS, Of Ohio desired to be heard
The SPEAKER The gentleman from New York is
upon the floor.
Mr. cox, Of Ohio, appealed to Mr. HOARD to permit
his colleague to make his statement.
Mr.. HOARD gave way.
Mr.. BURNS Mr. Speaker, IL will be remembered
that on last Friday week the member from New
York Mr.. HoAnDl mounted the Clerks stand in this
House and read a paragraph from the New York Til
bune nsnuatng collusion between the President and
myself. pronounced il then as do this day base
slander The slang had signature to it, and he re-
fused to endorse II there defendant to the
tion of The House refused to to take coSnzance
of it,
had hoped that members Of Congress, if they should
differ in politics otherwise would endeavor to act to
wards each other gentlemen II they should happen to
do each other injury at the impulse through msn
formation they would retract Under that belief ad-
dressed note to the member from New York, desiring
him examine into the truth alsity of the nsinua-
tons he found innocent to rise in his place and
set me right before the House In my seat all day
Thursday after had addressed him the card, and he
did not make motion in regard to It,
But last Friday, whilst was confined to my room,
and out of my seat the member t to bring my card
into this House. and instead of complying with the
quest contained in my note he reported to this House
the proceedings slow and made 1t the basis of his
second privileged Question instead of endeayoring to
fsten or make good the nsnuation against the Pres
dent and myself set forth in his Tribune paragraph
he introduced charge insinuation against me
alone 'by statement made by member Of this House
that to have certain official patronage appoint
ments in consideration, &c
Again making running nsnuation guerrilla tash'on,
without giving the members name, endorsing the
truth OF the insnuution himself
Mr. Speaker, when addressed the note to the member
from New York. did not Intend to have it come into
this House 1t was addressed b him with the under
standing OH my part that if he did not agree to
right he should drop note to that effect and not
run this House with it, to be screened by the rules of
this House
II must be manifest to this House that the member
intended from the start to make false and sanderos
record against me- stab my private characttrbeing
all the time cautious to avoid the responsibility pun
ishment of this House that might ens,e had he made d
rect charaes therefore, Mr.. Speaker dismiss the mem
ber from New York And say to this House, that from
this date he is at liberty to say publish anything he
may choose against me- this floor. shall, in the u
trc treat him and his slang with the contempt that he
and il melt in the estimation of honorable members.
Mr. Speaker, will state to this House but not in the
way of n reply the member from New York. that there
has been no collrsion between the President any Of
his cabinet and myself in regard to the promise of office
or official patronage i'm consideration Of vote have
given or have to give. Nor have | asked him for
appointment for myself any connexon earth since
have taken my seat in this Congress did the Pres
ent any of his cabinet any person for them either
directly indirectly, promise appointment for any
friend.
II Is true that filed application ten months since
for gentleman in my congressional district for the Office
of marshal in the northern district Of Ohio called on
the President hut once In his behalf since have taken
my seat and that in company with my friend. But the
President made promise that he would appoint him.
but did promise to give his claim favorable considera
ton when the vacancy would occur which will I've in this
month.
Mr. BURNS then submitted preamble, setting forth
that as Mr. HOARD had read from the Clerks desk
statement from the New York Tribune, charging him
with having voted against the resolution of Mr. HARRIS of
Illinois, with the understanding that he should have the
marshalshp of the northern district of Ohio resolved
that committee of five be appointed by the Speaker to
inquire if there any cousion between him and the
President and whether any improper attempts have been
made directly indirectly by any persons connected
with the executive departments of the government to in
ucnce any member Of the House upon any measure act
ed upon to be acted upon with power to send for per
sons and papers, and leave to report at any time by bill
or otherwise.
The SPEAKER stated that it appeared from the Globe
that the recollection of the gentleman from Alabama
Mr. HousToS correct, and that OF the Chair ncor
rect The report showed that the gentleman from New
York had addressed the House after the question
pounded Shall the resolution be received and enter
tanned question Of privilege
Mr.. HOARD said he had modified his resolution
The SPEAKER stated that the gentleman from New
York was entitled proceed the resolution had been
modified since he had addressed the House.
Mr.. STANTON, of Ohio, hoped the gentleman from
New York would accept the proposition of the gentleman
from Ohio
Mr. HOARD contended that his resolution involved the
privileges of the House, and should be adopted He be-
eved that the influence of the executive department of
the furnished the very germ of all the wrongs
which they nquiring into He supposed any meas
ure that tended sway the action of the House by
sidcrations other than those of public nature
breach of the privileges of the House. matter whether
it emanatod from manufacturing company the cxccu
tive departments He had promised to give the names
of the persons who had made statements to him before
taking his scat. This due to the gentleman from
Ohio, in order that he might know why he had not
piled to his letter He had been informed that Mr. NOR
RIs Illinois, had twice attempted to obtain the floor TO
make confirmation of the statement which the gen.
tlenlan from Ohio had denied. McssrS HARRs, NORRIS
and SMITH, of Illinois, had told him before he received
the letter referred to that far the first clause of the
statement in the Tribune concerned it was not false
Mr. MoRRs had not spoken to him, but to honorable
member of the House, who he thought willing to
make the statement.
Mr. BLAIR of Missouri said that his recollection of
what Mr. MoRRs had said TO him substantially what
the gentleman from New York had stated to the House