The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-01-19

! cause the constitution and parliamentary law re-
qure the House toproceed to the election of SNEAK
er, without debate aud DELAY.
The Clerk decided that Mr. Wasbburno could not
deprive Mr.. Clopton of the floor
The point of order was further discussed Mr.
Washburne insisting that the Clerk should execute
the law and put the question.
Mr.. HOUsTON protested against Mr.. Washburne's
interference and Interruptions.
The CLERK said he knew of no parliamentary
practice which would warrant Mr.. Washburne in
taking the floor from Mr.. Clopton.
Mr.. WAsHBURNE replied that he did not take the
floor from him.
Mr.. MoREHEAD appealed from the Clerk decision.
There was much confusion throughout these pro
ceedings.
Mr.. PHELPS expressed his astonishment at the
factous conduct on the Republican side, and asked
whether their conduct was courteous.
Mr.. WAsHBURNE and others to speak
MIR. CRAIGE, of North Carolina, called them to
order.
Mr.. BURNETT insisted that the Clerk enforce his
decision.
Mr; KELLOGG suggested that Mr.. Clopton proceed
WIN ms remarks, and that when he shall have con-
cluded his remarks the House proceed to vote for
Speaker Cries of ''good; that's right" on the
Democratic side
The House, he said, should vote occasionally, at
least once week, for Speaker. There was no use
In trying to pass the plurality rule. 1t can't be OBJ
tanned.
Mr.. WAsHBURNE said he would do no such thing
He had the right and he wanted to understand
These were the only words heard as be was fire.
quently interrupted by calls to order from the
Democratic side
Mr.. MoREHEAD said, Mr. Clerk, cant Won put the
question to the House? [Cries of ''order' from
the same source
Mr.. CnAIGE, of North Carolina, participated il.
tins running debate and he, in turn, was loudly
called to order by the Republican side of the House
The CLERK suggested that as the question had
oeen raised as to the right of Mr. Clopton to the
noor, the point be submitted to the House.
Many on the Democratic side objected to this
and hnaly after more noisy proceedings and points
OF order, Mr. Clopton commenced his remarks.
lie said that there was but little, if any, disa-
greement in his Congressional district on the
point, that in the event of the election of a Black
Republican President, the South should secede
from the Coniederacy. The people would not sub
init To such rule. An imperious necessity exists
for the South to prepare to defend her rights 1t
is folly to say that the Union is not in danger. The
hgaments which bound it are one bv one being
broken. We stand on the verge of volcano and
It's trembling movements portend the cruption.-
Union meetings could not bring security to the
Southern people, for the North was thoroughly
hostile to Southern rights. The South does not
want resolves, but action Let the North put con-
serVatlve men in office, and then there would be
some substantial evidence of returning sense 1f
justice.
In the event of the election of a Black Republican
to the Presidency, the Union cannot and oupbt not
to be maintained. He was particularly severe on
the Republicans, and said that they ignored State
sovereignty, and proposed to interfere with
otate-flghtS IN the prosecution of their fanatica
purposes. In conclusion he advocated the policy of
secession as preventive remedy against injustice
Mr.. CARTER, of New York. gave his reasons for
voting for Mr.. Sherman. He said he did not. by
doing so, endorse the doctrines of the Helper book
Instead of the Democratic party being national it
was pro-slaveTy. He wished to know whether the
South Americans advocate Congressional protection
to slavery in the Territories.
Messrs. flardeman, Quarles, Moore, of Kentucky
and Boteler, said in effect that they did.
Mr.. ErHERIDGE said that, according to the inter
probation of the Kansas Nebraska act, the people
have the right to regulate the question of slavery
In their own way; and, so help him God, he would
never vote to put slavery in those territories so
long as that act remains unrepealed.
Mr.. BRIGGs, of New York, explained his views on
the question. lie never believed there was anv ne
cessIty for any protection for slavery beyond what
was required by the Constitution. He advocated a
Kind OF squatter sovereignty question.
Mr.. CARTER, resuming said he understood the
Southern Opposition to be in favor of such a code
Much of the time occupied in asking ques-
tlons as to the position of various gentlemen on the
question of slave code for the Territories
The House then adjourned