Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-01-21
THIRTY-sIxTH CONGRESS.
SENATE.
Senate not in session.

AAAAAA Il
FRIDAY, Jan. 20.
SENATE.
Senate not in session.
HOUSE.
Mr.. CURTIS said the eyes of the country are
upon the House and they must extricate them
selves from their present position. The pre-
vious question on Mr.. Hutchins plurality reso-
luton having been called it must be decided
and till then all debate is out of order.
The CLERK remarked that while he was
willing to submit any question to the House,
the gentleman from Iowa could not take the
floor from the gentleman from Missouri to
press his point
Mr.. NoELL's opening remarks, were almost
unintelligible in the reporters gallery owing
to the prevalent confusion, but he was under
stood to discuss the following points first,
the federal government is Il compact of sover-
eign states second, the powers of the depart
ments are with special reference to the
reserved rights of the state, and are there
by provided for protection of both federal
and state governments thirdly, any attempted
infraction is a violation of these rights the
remedy is by an appeal to the mode set forth
in the constitution, and not by notification !;
and fourthly, when all constitutional means
have failed, revolution is preferable to further
submission. Then they must resort to the
ultima ratio, and it would become the true pol
icy of the South to secede from the Union.
He argued that secession did not originate in
the South, but i'll Massachusetts, during the
war of 1872. He maintained that three
fourths of the country are with the South on
the real question at issue, which is one of
power, and of which slavery is mere Incl
dent.
A colloquy followed between Messrs. FARMS
WORTH and MCCLERNAND as to the position of
the Illinois Democrats on the subject of slave
ry in the territories, and in which Mr.. Morris
of Illinois subsequently took part.
Mr.. Pryor rose to personal explanation.
He referred to an article in the New York Her.
aid yesterday in reference to him, saying he
was under no obligations to respond to any is
sue from the pen or inspiration OF James Cor
don Bennett, Il notorious individual, and con-
spicuous by his persistent and labored viola
tons OF all the rights and virtuous instincts of
humanity who had supplied himself with
money, and the means of pernicious influence,
by eXtOrting contribution from the viOatorS of
innocence; a wretch who bears OH his back
the scars OF many merited chastisements, and
whose heart is tainted by every conceivable
contamination u miscreant, conSenting to
the dishonor of his own family, crime which
no language is commensurate to express Il
foul and loathesOme creature, whose name is
worthy of execraton, and from whose contact
virtue shrieks; fiend denied the friendship of
the social circle man covered with infamy
and shame, and the opprobium of humanity.
Abiding to that editorial article, Mr.. Pryor
asked Mr.. Milson whether it was true, as that
editorial stated, that he Pryor had been re-
buked the other day for language used in de-
bate
Mr.. MILLsoN replied that he intended no
personal rebule, but his design was to protect
the dec0rum of the House. There were other
transgressons of the rules of order, that day.
and he had determined if possible to arrest
this sort of discussion. which miUht lead to
calamitous results
Mr.. PRYoR said his colleaoue,s exclamation
was satisfactory but there remained an issue
between his colleague and himself. He nm
derstood his colleague to say the employment
of the term he made use of was unpariament.
ary. for which one might Justly be called to
order He pryor now proposed to vindicate
himself from the charge of infractiug the dig
nifty of parliamentary discussion, by the indis.
criminate and deliberate use of the term. He
remarked that Mr. Hickman had made an in
furious and untounded imputaton on the char
acter of the South. and on his colleagues.
Under that impression he traversed the allega-
cation, and stigmatized his sentiments as false.
The word false did not necessarily imply an
insult. A gentleman's statement NAV be false
and yet he may not design an untruth. Was
there any phrase more legitimate? If the
speeches of Fox, Burke, Clay, Randolph, and
Others, be referred to, it would be found they
had psed this fern He understood Mr. Nc
Clernand the other day stigmatized some
statement of Mr.. Hickman as false; and Mr..
Montgomery had applied the term falsehood to
one of his Pennsylvania colleagues These
gentlemen were not rebuked. Why was he
made solitary exception?
Mr. HOWARD of Ohio, rising to a personal
explanation caused to be read Washington
letter to tile New York Express, in which
II was mentioned as a rumor. that Mr..
Wendell and Mr.. Weed had entered into n
nriyate arrangement to elect Mr.. sherman. bv
rprocnrng the absence of certain western
nemncrais Mr. Harvard omono The number
Tic corresnondept however had said he did
not hoIiave Inc members were nrivv TO the use
Tins made If their names Mr. Howard said
ba nonsidered lis rnlInague Mr. sherman n
norsect ,rontlenan Inf thew were at the antin.
ppJos in nnIititirs He diJ not wish Il TO 20
out that he wonId Give him his negative vote
INV absentlng himself from the House, He had