The Washington union., 1858-02-11

Having published Mr.. vallandgham's card, we ac
cede to the request of Mr.. Gilmer to admit his reply
which appeared in the Globe of yesterday
CARD
In reply to Mr. yallandieham's card Of the 5th pub
ished in the Globe Of yesterday permit to say that
Mr. Vallangham docs not TO discriminate between
what he actually did, and what he says his object
dong He admits he gave the vote, but says his object
TO reconsider and concludes with the assertion that
the relation Of the vote be gave is Fan utter misstate
mont of the truth of the record Now, what appears
Of record @ he did, is thing; what he explains TO have
been his object doing this (which docs not appear
the record,) is daoS hing. And conceive that what
actually appears may be stated without mourning the
guilt of IAN utter msstatemcnt Of the truth of the
record"
What is the law, which he admits he voted for mh the
reconsy2 1t for law repeating another law
of long standing; section of which is as follows
"s,cuos That person persons shall
after permitted evidence in court Of
ord this STATE in oise depending on ns'er Of
prosecution shall Instituted behalf OF 'h. State
any white person.
He excuses his vote in favor OF repeating the above
ton the ground that he desired his vote 10 be ia
ror that he might reconsider He also says he voted
thirteen times upon various motions, all intended. directly
or indirectly to cnbarras defeat the bill but he
docs not state how he voted ON these various motions
BY referring the Journal page $50, it will be seen that
Mr.. Kacr moved to postpone the bill until the first Mon
day of December "a period beyond the session. 49,
nays 36-Mr. Nallandigbam voting may l would
suOtnN strange vote iOr
opposed to the bill and particularly for Tic member Jen
whoui a' dsred hs brsness Of engineering its d,(eaf On
page f5l OF the Journal it appears Mr. Bloomhu moved
to postpone the bill indeinitelyycas 49, nays 3i-Mr
Vallandisham voting may. His this occasion
would have killed the bill bi 0s role | submit respect
fully that Mr. vaandigham remss and especially so
for who engineer TO defeat the bill For this vote
the ingenuity of cannot find room for the excuse that
he gave with view to reconsider To defeat On the
same page (45D he voted yea ordering the bill
to be cngrossed which vote in favor Of the
repeal and vote he admits to be test vote. On jour
nal page 523, the question being 'Sha the bill pass p
yeas a. nays 3O Mr. vallandigham voting ''yea This
vote he says given with view TO reconsider Mr..
Blake moved to reconsider. On this motion Mr.. lb-
herd demanded tho previous question yeas ~ nays rs,
Mr. Yaandigham not voting at all but 1t does appear
On page 52i that Mr. vallandigham with eleven Others,
voted yea to reconsider, forty-thrcc others voting
nay IA result unfsvornbe to working like an en-
gnccr to defeat the hill admit that Mr. Nalandghan,
IN the course of considering this bl as appears from
The journal gave votes that indicated that he was
opposed to the bill and had not been stopped in the
debate would have read Oh 10 have done him am
PIE Justice, far as the journal could show.
JOHN A. GILMER
FEBRUARY g. 1853
tREE NEGROES TExAs Tho Legislature Of Texas has