Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1860-01-02
A Card.


In the House Of Representatives, on Thursday
last, the following colloquy occurred between MY.
Grow Of Pennsylvania, and myself:
Mr. Grow And bad the gentleman from North
Carolina Mr.. Brsnchl been as familiar with con-
stitutional law and parliamentary precedent. as
his long practice in legislation would have led
70 suppose, he could have found sufficient and
abundant reasons to justify my conduct and that
Of ma jOritv Of the House, without violating all
parliamentary and gentemanlv courtesies that are
recognized in all deliberate bodies by impugn-
ing the motives of his peer. and charging sordid
and selfish considerations the moving motive
and cause Of our action.
Mr.. Branch desire to sk the gentleman
from Pennsylvania whether am to understand
his language as imputng to ME any conduct that
was ungentlemanly,
Mr. Crow said that the gentleman violated
all parliamentary and pentlemany courtesies that
are recognized in all deliberative assemblies 1t
needs no reference to parliamentary law to know
that. The first rule Of parliamentary law is that
no gentleman has the right to impugn the motives
of another.
Mr. Branch desire to ask the gentleman
whether he means. by that language, to impute to
me any conduct that is ungentlemanlv
Mr. Crow ask the gentleman to refer to his
own language, and see what he thinks
Mr. Branch.-I demand of the gentleman from
PenEsYlvania TO know whether be means. by that
language, to impnte to any conduct that is UNI
gerternanly or nnbecomng,
Mr. GroW.-fhe gentleman charged, the other
day that had defeated the Post Office appropri-
alton bill in order TO compel the President of the
nted States TO call an extra session Of Congress
say that such an imputaticn nv motives was
not gentlemanly under parliamentary law.
Mr.. Branch.-I repeat the question which |
have already asked the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania-whether he designs. in those remarks, to
impnte to M any conduct unbecoming a gentle
man! failure to respond / shall assume to be
an affirmative answer.
Mr.. Grow MIR. Clerk | take the lanUuaoe of
the gentleman. What have said on it is plain
English, and there it stands The gentleman. the
other day. impugned my motives Of action on the
Post Office bill. The impugnment of motives in
Legislative body is everywhere regarded not
only AZ unpariiamentary. but ungentemanly,
under parliamentary practice and law.
Mr. Branch.-l repeat that the gentleman has
not responded to my inquiry, and that shall take
his failure to respond as an Affirmative answer
MI Grow.-The gentleman can take just wha.
he rle1scs
MIR. Grow Il will read the gentleman's own
language, Fl ON the Globe of Monday last
Immediately after the occurrence addressed to
Mr. Grew, and handed to my friend Mr. Winsow
for delivery note, Of which the following is a
copy:
WASHINGTON CITY. d. c., Dec 90. 1859
Sly: Will Won please name time and place
outside the District Of Columbia at which Won
will receive from me a communication in writing
Verv respectfully, LOB BRANCH
Hon Galusha A. Grow
On the copy of this note (retained) is an indorse
The note Of which this is a COPY was handed To
me by Mr.. Branch Immediately after the coloouy
between him and Mr. Grow No opportunity
occurred Of delivering it, without attracting undue
attention, until met Mr. Grow at the Capitol or
Friday. WARREN WISsLow
During Friday evening received from Mr..
Grow, through Hon. r f. Fenton, of New York
reply. Of which the following is copy:
WARRINGTON. City, Dec 30, 1859.
O'Clock. % m.
SIR Your note of the 29th inst was placed in
my hands by your friend, Gov Winslow at T.!
makes Il necessary for to name a time and
place outside the District of Columbia to receive
from you communication In writing. Your
note was doubtless as nothing else has occurred
between MS, based upon remarks made bv me in
debate In the House Of Representatives, in reply
To yonr speech lmpngning my motives, and the
integrity Of my acts as legislator
On ttat occasion used no language in violation
OF parliamentary law. and not warranted by yonr
reInarks thus iWpugning nv conduct
III your note is to be considered of hostile char
actel then have thisto reply: Regarding duelng
ss Mt variance with the pT-cepts Of the christian
religion. and the sentiments of Il christian psople
and it being prohibited and declared crime by
the laws enacted by the body Of which We are
members, ! cannot recognize il as jus.ifablc
mode Of settling difficulties among men even in
CAGES Of unwarrantable prOvocation. Bu. my per-
sonal rights, and the freedom Of debate griaran-
teed by the Constitution, shall defend whenever
they assailed.
Very respectfully, yours,
GALUsHA A. GROW.
Hon l.. OBI. BRANCH
BY those who are acquainted with the penal
code Of this District. to which my attention is
drawn by Mr.. Grow in his letter. it will be readi-
" understood that other course is left me than
Ia publish this narrative. and leave the whole
matter to the impartial judgment Of honorable
men Of all sections Of the country
l.. OBJ. BRANCH
Washington City, Jan 9, 1850
III Dumas, IT,, sold the copyright of his new
play, which all Paris is praising, for SIS 600.