The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1860-01-12
Saturday, January 7, 1850.
The Senate was not in session.
uOTrSE

GU oSScout VI tut proceedings Vi u Union meet
ing at that place. in which patriotic sentiment:
were avowed. The meeting declared the duty
of obedience to the Constitution as the supreme
law of the land, condemning John Browns
raid into Virginia and his sympathizers, and
that all persons preaching or melting insurrec
ton were guilty of moral treason. Mr.. Cobb
expressed his pleasure at finding such senti
ments coming from Massachusetts.
Mr.. Eliot, of Massachusetts, said the honora.
BILE gentleman from Alabama did not say anv-
thing new TO the delegation from Massachusetts
nor did he say anything new to the citizens OF
Massachusetts, when he asked the Clerk to read
from his desk these Union-loving resolutions
There was not a more OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
and conservative constituency Ito borrow the
language of tho other side) in the United
States than that constituency living there
where the first landing was made, when, in
1902, Bartholomew Goswell first placed his
foot upon this continent. And from the time
the Mayaower anchored there, and landed her
little colony at Plymouth--from the time the
Constitution was accepted, down TO the present
hour-there had never been body of men
anywhere who would more assuredly, firmly,
directly, and undoubtedly, stand up on the side
of law and order, for the Constitution and for
the right, than these same men who met
1
claim their allegiance to the Union aud the
law. Of the eight hundred men who signed
the call for that meeting, did the honorable
gentleman know how many, if they were sent
here to represent their constituents would be
ranged on that (Republican) side of the House
| Mr.. Cobb. l do not care how many, if they
entertain sentiments like these.
Mr.. Eliot said the men who in Massachu.
sets, would dissent from the spirit of those res
olutions-he did not speak of their phraseology
but OF their spirit-were the men who would be
standing here side by side with the secession.
lists and disunionists Of the South-with those
gentlemen who are for tearing down the Con.
stitution and destroying tse institutions of the
land. Not the Republicans, not the order
loving Democrats, not they who were repre-
scented at that meeting, would dissent from
those resolutions, but another class of men
| altogether.
Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, avowing that he
cared nothing about the Spoils, suggested that
there could be union of all the clements op
posed to the Republicans. Let the Democrats
have the Speaker, who would he the represent
ative of principle, and lat the Southern op
position and the Anti-Lecompton men have the
other offices.
Mr.. Stokes, of Tennessee, occupied the floor
for some time, and argued to show that the
fault Of non-organization was with the Demo
Gratis, who never yet had presented such union
OF their own elements to enable the South
ern Opposition To cooperate with them in the
election of Speaker. He said, that while the
Southern Opposition could not affiliate with the
Republicans, because they considere'
sectional, they did not recognize "a then
party as NATIONAL organization De He raut
from sunasy democratic papers ~ nrova t tLo
Tue democratic party ia snlit into fact;ons
aHfeetaS upon Ga se.sled principles.
/. IN ths course Of his remarks. Mr. Stotao q,
trded TO the failure of the Democra,s 20 oa o.
tSelf votes for Mr., Gilmer, when their votes
would have elected him, and argued that thew
were iAsineeEa IN protesting desire for the
elesnen q any conservative man.
eeVefal democratic members said thew could
pes we've 'ee @r. Gilmer, because he received
f'eeuooo..n votes.
ar. Stokes put the question to the Demo
| cratic side of the House-whether, if Mr.. Boz
cock should again be put in nomination, and
| should receive the votes of all the Democrats,
and all the Southern Opposition members, and
then few cpublicans-suflicient to secure
his election-should cast their votes for him,
under protest-they 1.-THE Democrats) would
withdraw their votes from him, for that reason.
Messrs. Rust of Arkansas, Vallandigham of
Ohio, Wright of Tennessee, and Davidson of
louisiana, declared that they would withhold
| their votes from any Democrat who should re-
ceive Republican votes.
Mr. English, of Indiana, said he would not
withhold his vote from Democrat because
Republicans voted for him, and gave as his
reason, that if the Democrats should pursne
that course, the Republicans could prevent
them from ever clecting Speaker, by casting
q few votes for their candidate
Several other members on the Democratic
side said they would not withhold their votes
from Mr.. Bocock under the circumstances sup
posed, but gave reasons why they would not
vote for Mr.. Gilmer under like circumstances.
Mr.. Stokes in his further remarks, said he
preferred a candidate of bis own party but as
between a sound and conservative Democrat
and Republican, he should vote for tho Dem.
ocrat,
Mr.. Winsow moved that the House proceed
to vote for Speaker, and demanded the previous
question.
Mr. Hickman asked the House TO vote down
the demand for the previous question, SO that
he might move to ofSer an amendment to adopt
the plurality rule, in accordance with previous
notice,
IAere was call of the House, as preliminary
to voting.
Mr.. Hickman said he would resist vote un.
til the House could vote on the amendment for
the plurality rule.
Mg. Garnet replied, that many gentlemen ON
the Democratic side would resist till March,
1861, the adoption Of that rule.
Mr.. Hickman was ready for the ISSUE Let
the responsibility of non-organization rest on
the heada of the Democratic side.
AH Clark, OF Missouri, said that he should
first insist on vote on his resolution, declaring
that no man who signed the recommendation
OF the Helper book was fit to be Speaker of
the House,
Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, said the first
question that could be taken was upon his
question of order, that no resolutions of any
kind are in order until after the organization of
the House, He could not agree to take the
vote on all questions in the order in which
they stand, which would be to override his
question of order.
Mr.. Stanton concurred with the gentleman
from Pennsylvania. He was willing to vote
on all questions as they arose in parliamentary
order.
Mr.. Winslow said that the plurality rule
could not be voted on for very long time
in his belief never. fsi
Mr. Bingham wished to know, If the Republi-
oone "oulu conStnb 10 vote on Mr. Clark'S res
olution, whether Mr.. Clark would consent then
to vote on the proposition for the plurality rule
Mr.. Clark Indignantly objected to any such
arrangement as that proposed.
After discussion, in which many members
participated, vote was taken on the demand
Of the previous question, which was decided in
the afirmative-yeas, log, nays, los. So the
previous question was ordered. 80.
Mr.. Davis, of Indiana, said the time had ar.
rived, in his opinion, when this House ought to
be organized. He presented the name Of An
uorn.1fon 81