The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1860-01-10
,EIGHTR vOLUME--NUMBER ssJ

rectionary doctrines of that book He was illus.
tratlng his position, and, with that vicw, he had
used strong figures of speech. He did not mean
to insinuate that gentlemen would do ANYTHING
dishonorabe; but he would put the question, would
they support the nominee of the Republican party
it they believed that he adopted those doctrines!
Mr. Curtis. The gentleman knows that would
not cannot suppose that the gentleman serious
ly believes the republican members to be so in
sensible to honor as to dare support any one who
would adopt such doctrines. That book contains
infamous matter. deuouuee and disclaim it. and
SO docs every other man upon this floor.
Mr. Smith. Your candidate has not done it.
Several voices: Yes, he has
Alr Smith read the remarks of Mr. Sherman in
relation to the Helper book, aud put the question
to him directly, does he disclaim the doctrines of
that book (?
Mr. Sherman made no reply.
Mr. Smith, after pause resumed. The gentle
man is silent-he is dumb--he is mute as an
oyster.
Mr. Nelson (opp., of Tenn made some remarks,
saying that when MIR Sherman rose in the House
and stated that he had FIVE times disavowed any
intention of interfering with slavery in the States
he considered that that was repudiating the doc
trines of the Helper book.
Mr. Morris, of Pcnnsy yvania said he was sup
porter of Mr. Sherman because lie knew him 20 be
u
delivered by Mr. Sherman in 1856 in proof of the
fact.
Mr. Smith could not allow the candidate Of the
Republican party to speak by deputy. If that
gentleman wanted to be vindicated before the coun-
try he should speak for himself ask hin, now
does he endorse the Helper book "Speak, or
forever after hold your peace" Laughter
No response being made, Mr. Smith proceeded
to say that it was the duty Of the House to pro-
L. Il.
officer who declined to denounce that infamous
book. He then alluded to the remarks of MIR Grow
the other day, and went on to show that MIR Grow
responsible for the defeat of the Postofce ap.
preparation bill at the last session.
Mr. Branch, of N. c., corroborated what had
been said on this point by the gentleman from
Virginia, having been member Of the committee
of conference on that bill He declared that the
sole responsibility of it's defeat rested on Mr. Grow
and believed his object to compel the Presi-
dent to call extra session of Congress, in order
that he and his friends might, at an earlier day
than was allowed by law get possession of the or
ganization of the House.
Mr. Grow responded to the remarks made by
Mr. Branch. He said that Mr. Branch had viola
ted all parliamentary and gentlemanly courtesy in
his motives.
Mr. Branch-I ask whether the gentleman
means to mpute to me any conduct unbeconing
gentleman?
Mr. Crow ask the gentleman to refer to his
own language
MIR Branch-I again ask whether you impute
to me conduct unbecoming gentleman
Mr. Grow-The gentleman said that wished
the defeat of the Postofice appropriation bill to
compel the President to call an extra session.
say this imputation was not gentlemanly.
Mr. Branch-Do yeu design imputing to me any
conduct unbecoming gentleman 7
Mr. Grow-What said was very plain English.
There it stands. The gentleman impugned my
action on the Postofice appropriation BILL which
everywhere is thought to be an Infringement of
law
Mr. Branch-The gentleman not responding to
he inquiry, shall take failure=to respond as an
affirmative answer
Mr Grow-You can do as you please. The gen.
leman said my object to kill the bill, that the
President might be compelled to call an extra ses-
ion. He took back nothing that he had said.
After the above discussion, it is stated that Mr.
Branch challenged Grow.