The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1866-07-23
Congres.i..ai Proceedins...
WASHINGTON, July 81.

HOUSE-Mr. Rice, of Massachusetts,
from the Committee on Naval Affairs
reported back the Senate bill passed
June Ia, to define and regulate the ap
pointment Of officers of the navy, Will
amendnents. iDn OH ull LOT. &
Mr.. Spalding called up the resolution
directing the Speaker to reprimand MIR
Rousseau for his assault upon Mr. Grin
nell. y, ~ u-, .9g,-,-rGa .9ur =
Mr.. Rousseau obtained consent to make
O personal explanation. He said he felt
it his duty to the House and to himself
to say q word or two oA the matter
which had given him 80 much pain and
modification. He thought members had
misunderstood his position and the feel,
ings and motives which had prompted
him. He had sat here and heard himself
denounced in a way in which no member
should speak of another, and which Ger
tainly did not tend to good feeling. lie
thought that the remarks Of the gentle
man from Ohio Garfield the Other DAY
were unfair and unjust toward him.
although that gentleman had reason tor
proclaiming friendship to him. 1t seem.
ed as if he and the gent from Iowa
Wilson had supposed they were prose
cutting a criminal. He thought they
should have cohe there unintiuenced by
passion and prejudice.
Mr. Stevens objected to q criticism OF
the Judgment of the House by a man
who was under sentence.
The Speaker ruled that the romarks OF
the gentleman stating that the members
were influenced by passion were not in
order. =. e
Mr.. Rosseau proffered his readiness, II
he had said anything improper, to take
it back. All he had said was, that the
member should have come to the con.
sideratien of the case unprejudiced. Ii
that were not so, then he was in error.
He appealed to the House if those gen
tlemen fGarfeld and Wilson had not
shown far more passion in words and &C.
ton than he himself.
Mr.. Stevens again rose, and said he
must object to criticism Oh the Judgment
of the House.
Mr.. Rosseau protested that he not re,
flectea on the judgment of the House.
He was simply speaking of the argument
of the gentlemen.
The Speaker intimated that it was not
in order to impute passion to the mem.
bers '' DO"
Mr.. Rosseau said that he would take
that back He asked the Speaker
whether he would be allowed tosay that
An effort had been made to create excite
ment against him by bringing in the cir
cumstances of fist fight in some part
of the capitol.
The Speaker replied that the gentle
man had already said so. a
Mr.. Rousseau said that he would then
stick to it and not take it back. He
went on to say that he was sorry to see
an effort to influence the members, by
bringing up in discussion a fist fight
which had nothing to do with the case.
The House should not have been called
upon to listen to things of that sort i;
his friend from Massachusetts Mr..
Banks) seemed to have been lying In
wait until the close of the argument,
and when all reply was cnt off, made an
appeal against him such as is rarely
heard in q court of justice, even in casas
of the highest crimes known to the law.
He thought the House could determine
the matter juot oo weu without that ap'
peal as with it. He must say that the
proceedings in this case had not been
entirely just to him.
Mr., Stevens said that he must insist
that it was out of order to criticise the
mode by which the House arrived at its
judgement.
The Speaker sustained the point of or
der reading from the manual a sentence
that no prior determination of the House
is to be reflected by any member unless he
means to conclude with a motion to re-
scind.
Mr Rousseau remarked that that was
the farthest from his intention.
Mr.. Stevens said there was no mistak-
ing the whole course of the gentleman's
argument He objected to it, and in
stead of the House being reprimanded
he asked that respondent be reprimand-
ed according to the order af the House
Mr. Rousseau protested that he found
no fault with the decision of the House,
and said he should submit to it like a
man as we'll as he could. He asked wheth-
er he would be allowed to say that the
members who were to be his judges had
appeared before the committee and
prosecuted the case against him.
The Speaker said he did not think the
gentleman had a right to challenge the
motiues of members.
Rousseau repeated his assurance that
he did not tiud fault with the decision Of
the House He was merely speaking Of
the manner in which that decision had
been brought about If he was not al
lowed to do so he had nothing to say on
the subject.
Mr.. Banks said he did not doubt but
that the gentleman from Kentucky
meant to speak in vindicatiOn of him
self, and not to impugn the motives of
members, but he certainly did that when
he spoke of the gentleman from Massa
chusetts lying in wait for the close OF
the discussion. That certainly implied
a motive which was not creditable, and
it was entirely untrue that the member
from Massachusetts, had spoken because
the report Of tho committee had been
violently assailed, and there had been no
arrangement and motive 1t was mat
ter of pure accident.
Mr.. Garfield declared that he was en-.
tirely unconscious of having used any
unfair argument or having been actua.
ted by any unfair motive. 1t seemed to
him, however, that if the whole matter
could be reviewed this way then tie
order of the House would be reversed,
and he (Mr. Rousseau) would be repri-
manding the House instead Of being
repiimanded by the House.
The Speaker said he had so decided
three times.
Mr.. Rousseau said he would be sorry