H. OF R.] Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: Election of Printer. Mr. COFFEE, submitted a resolution, in substance, that the House proceed to the election of a printer for the 24th Congress; which was agreed to. BLAIR & RIVES; Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, nominated Mr. PEYTON, of Tennessee, nominated Messrs. BRADFORD & LEARNED. In accepting the high station to which I am called by the voice of the assembled representatives of the people, I am deeply impressed with the high distinction which is always conferred upon the presiding officer of this House, and with the weight of the responsibility which devolves upon him. Without experience in this place, called to preside over the deliberations of this House, I feel that I ought to invoke, in advance, the indulgent forbearance of its members, for any errors of judgment which may occur in the discharge of the severe duties which will devolve upon me. It shall be my pleasure to endeavor to administer the laws which may be adopted for the government of the House justly and impartially towards its members, and with a view to the preservation of that order which is indispensable to our character as a body, and to the promotion of the public interests. To preserve the dignity of this body, and its high character before the country, so far as shall depend upon its Whereupon Messrs. Blair & Rives were depresiding officer, will be objects of my deepest so-clared duly elected printers to the twenty-fourth licitude; and I am sure I shall have the co-operation and support of all its members, in the discharge of my duty, with a view to these objects. I return to you, gentlemen, my sincere acknowledgments for this manifestation of your confidence, in electing me to this high station; and my ardent hope is, that our labors here may merit and receive the approbation of our constituents, and result in the advancement of the public good. Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, (the oldest member in the House,) administered the usual oath to the Speaker, when the latter qualified the members by States, as also the territorial delegates from Arkansas, Florida, and Michi gan. Mr. BEARDSLEY submitted a resolution pointing Mr. WALTER S. FRANKLIN Clerk of the House; which was agreed to. Whole number of votes 223; necessary to a choice 112. For Messrs. Blair & Rives, Scattering, Congress. TUESDAY, December 8. 133 59 26 7 Messrs. JACKSON of Massachusetts, GALBRAITH of Pennsylvania, and TURNER of Maryland, appeared, and were qualified. President's Message. A Message was received from the President of the United States, by Mr. DONELSON, his private secretary; which was read. (See Senate proceedings of this date.) Mr. BEARDSLEY submitted a resolution, comap-mitting the Message to a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; and that 10,000 copies, together with the accompanying documents, be printed for the use of the members of the House; which was agreed to. Death of Mr. Smith. A message was received from the Senate, announcing that that body, having assembled and formed a quorum, were ready to proceed with legislative business; and that a committee had been appointed on the part of the Senate, A message was received from the Senate, to meet such committee as might be appointed announcing the death of the honorable NATHAN on the part of the House, to wait on the Presi- SMITH, a member of that body, from the State dent of the United States, and inform him that of Connecticut, and that his funeral would take Congress, having assembled, are ready to re-place at twelve o'clock to-morrow. ceive any communication which he may choose to make. Glascock, Seaton Grantland, Charles E. Haynes, Hopkins Mr. TOUCEY, of Connecticut, submitted a resolution that the members of the House would Missouri.-William H. Ashley, Albert G. Harrison. Illinois.-Zadock Casey, William L. May, John Reynolds. Indiana.-Ratliff Boon, John Carr, John W. Davis, Edward A. Hannegan, George L. Kinnard, Amos Lane, Jonathan McCarty. Alabama.-Reuben Chapman, Joab Lawler, Dixon H. Ripley. Tennessee.-John Bell, Samuel Bunch, William B. Carter, William C. Dunlap, John B. Forester, Adam Huntsman, Cave Johnson, Luke Lea, Abram P. Maury, Balie Peyton, James K. Polk, E. J. Shields, James Standefer. Kentucky.--Chilton Allan, Lynn Boyd, John Calhoon, John Chambers, Richard French, William J. Graves, Benjamin Hardin, James Harlan, Albert G. Hawes, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph R. Underwood, John White, Sherrod Williams. min Jones, William Kennon, Daniel Kilgore, Sampson Mason, Jeremiah McLene, William Patterson, Jonathan Sloane, David Spangler, Bellamy Storer, John Thompson, Samuel F. Vinton, Taylor Webster, Elisha Whittlesey. DELEGATES. Arkansas Territory.-Ambrose H. Sevier. attend the funeral of Mr. SMITH, and would wear the usual badge of mourning for the space of thirty days; which was agreed to. MONDAY, December 14. Messrs. GRAVES of Kentucky, and GARLAND | of Louisiana, appeared, were qualified, and took their seats. Death of Mr. Wildman. Mr. HALEY, of Connecticut, announced the death of his colleague, the Hon. ZALMON WILDMAN, a Representative in Congress from the State of Connecticut; and, after a few remarks in eulogy of the deceased, submitted a motion for the usual demonstrations of respect for his memory; which was unanimously adopted. Death of Mr. Kane. A message was received from the Senate, announcing the death of the Hon. ELIAS K. KANE, Senator from the State of Illinois, and informing the House that the funeral will take place in the Senate chamber at half-past 12 o'clock. Whereupon, Mr. CASEY, of Illinois, moved the following resolution, which was adopted: Resolved, unanimously, That, in testimony of respect for the memory of the Hon. ELIAS K. KANE, late a Senator in Congress from the state of Illinois, the members of this House wear crape on the left arm for thirty days. WEDNESDAY, December 16. Mr. THOMPSON of South Carolina, and Mr. RIPLEY of Louisiana, appeared, were qualified, and took their seats. Slavery in the District of Columbia. Mr. FAIRFIELD, understanding, he said, that by a presentation of a petition, a member was not made responsible for its propositions, presented a petition signed by 172 females, praying the abolition of slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia, and moved that it be referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. Mr. CRAMER moved that it be laid on the table; which was agreed to. Mr. FAIRFIELD then presented a similar petition, which he moved to lay on the table. Mr. Mason, of Virginia, said, as it was extremely desirable to have an expression of sentiment on this subject, by the House, he would ask for the yeas and nays on the motion; and they were ordered. Mr. Boon called for the reading of the memorial. After it was read, Mr. EVERETT rose to ask whether the motion to lay on the table was made by the member who presented the petition. Mr. FAIRFIELD replied in the affirmative. Mr. SLADE moved that the memorial be printed. [H. OF R. Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, asked the division of the question. Mr. MASON, of Virginia, asked the yeas ana nays on the motion to print, and they were ordered. The question being taken on the motion to lay on the table, it was decided in the affirmative, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. C. Allan, Anthony, Ash, Ashley, Bailey, Barton, Beale, Bean, Beardsley, Beaumont, Bell, Bockee, Bond, Boon, Bouldin, Bovee, Boyd, Brown, Buchanan, Bunch, Burns, J. Calhoon, Cambreleng, Campbell, Carr, Carter, Casey, George Chambers, John Chambers, Chaney, Chapman, Chapin, Claiborne, Coffee, Coles, Connor, Corwin, Craig, Cramer, Crane, Cushman, Davis, Deberry, Dickerson, Doubleday, Dromgoole, Dunlap, Efner, Everett, Fairfield, Farlin, Forester, Fowler, French, Fry, Philo C. Fuller, William K. Fuller, Galbraith, James Garland, Rice Garland, Gillet, Glascock, Graham, Granger, Grantland, Graves, Grayson, Griffin, Haley, Joseph Hall, Hammond, Hannegan, Hard, Hardin, Harlan, Samuel S. Harrison, Albert G. Harrison, Hawes, Hawkins, Haynes, Hoar, Hopkins, Howard, Howell, Hunt, Huntington, Huntsman, Ingersoll, Ingham, Jabez Jackson, Jarvis, Joseph Johnson, Richard M. Johnson, Cave Johnson, Henry Johnson, John W. Jones, Benjamin Jones, Judson, Kennon, Kilgore, Kinnard, Klingensmith, Lane, Lansing, Lawler, Lawrence, Lay, Gideon Lee, Joshua Lee, L. Lea, Leonard, Lincoln, Logan, Loyall, Lucas, Lyon, Abijah Mann, Job Mann, Martin, John Y. Mason, William Mason, Moses Mason, Samson Mason, Maury, May, McComas, McKay, McKeon, McKim, Mercer, Milligan, Morgan, Muhlenberg, Owens, Page, Parks, Patterson, Franklin Pierce, James A. Pearce, Pettigrew, Phelps, Phillips, Pickens, Pinckney, Reed, John Reynolds, Joseph Reynolds, Ripley, Roane, Robertson, Seymour, Shepard, Shepperd, Shields, Shinn, Sickles, Spangler, Steele, Storer, Sutherland, Taliaferro, Taylor, Thomas, J. Thomson, W. Thompson, Toucey, Towns, Turner, Turrill, Underwood, Vanderpoel, Vinton, Wagener, Ward, Webster, Weeks, White, Lewis Williams, Sherrod Williams, Wise -180. NAYS.-Messrs. Adams, H. Allen, Banks, Borden, Briggs, W. B. Calhoun, Clark, Cushing, Darlington, Evans, Grennell, Hiland Hall, Harper, Hazeltine, Henderson, Heister, Hubley, William Jackson, Janes, Laporte, Love, Morris, Parker, Dutee J. Pearce, Potts, Russell, Slade, Sloane, Sprague, Wardwell, Whittlesey―31. FRIDAY, December 18. Mr. MCKENNAN appeared, was qualified, and took his seat. Slavery in the District of Columbia. Mr. JACKSON, of Massachusetts, presented a petition from sundry citizens of Massachusetts, praying Congress to provide for the immediate abolition of slavery within the District of Columbia; which he moved to refer to a select committee. Mr. HAMMOND moved that the petition be not received. The large majority by which the House had rejected a similar petition a few days ago, had been very gratifying to him, and no doubt would be very gratifying to the whole South. He had hoped it would satisfy gentlemen charged with such petitions, of the impropriety of introducing them here. Since, however, it had not had that effect, and they persisted still in urging them upon the House and upon the country, he thought it was not requiring too much of the House, to ask it to put a more decided seal of reprobation on them, by peremptorily rejecting this. Mr. THOMAS said he was surprised to discover that there are gentlemen who are not content with the evidence which has already been given that a very large majority of this House are opposed to any interference whatever, not only with the rights of slaveholders in the Southern States, but with the existence of slavery within the District of Columbia. We have already laid on the table, by a vote of nearly three to one, two memorials similar to the one now under consideration. But gentlemen say those votes are equivocal; they wish to have direct proof that the rights of slaveholders are not in danger from any interference on the part of Congress. Mr. T. said that he did not concur in this opinion. The vote to lay on the table had been given to signify a decided opposition to the prayer of the petitioners; nevertheless, he would make a motion which would, he thought, place this subject before the House in a position to afford an opportunity to remove all misapprehension which really existed, and deprive every man everywhere of all pretext for maintaining that southern property and southern rights are in danger. Mr. T. then moved to reconsider the vote just given by the House in favor of considering this petition, and said, if this motion is adopted, we shall then have this petition before us in the position in which it was placed when first presented to the House. In the vote given in favor of considering this memorial, many members had been undoubtedly taken by surprise. Some members who are in favor of rejecting this, and other similar memorials, and others who are in favor of receiving and then laying on the table this and all petitions of like import, united in the vote which he had moved to reconsider. This strange combination could not have been created without a mistake somewhere. Gentlemen must have supposed that by the adoption of the motion to consider this memorial, the difficulty which has arisen by reason of the decision of the Chair would alone be removed; and that, instead of postponing until to-morrow all action on this subject, we would now proceed to dispose of it, either by a vote to reject or to lay it on the table. Mr. PEYTON was in favor of the motion to reconsider. He would not have troubled the House with any remarks again, but for the position assumed by the gentleman from New York. That gentleman contended that the right of petition was a sacred right, guaranteed to every American citizen under the constitution; [DECEMBER, 1835. and that the House had no right to deprive them of the exercise of that right. Mr. P. said they had the right to petition, and to think and to say what they pleased; and, further, they had the right to send any matter they choose throughout all the country, without regard to consequences, and that House had no power to resist it. But, then, he claimed that, when it came to that House, the representatives had the right to treat it and dispose of it in such manner as they thought best. Was the sacred right of petition any dearer than many other sacred rights-the right to property, to liberty, and to life? Mr. RIPLEY said that in disposing of the question before the House, care should be taken rather to allay the public feeling than to add to the existing excitement. The right of petition was a solemn one, and had been guaranteed from the time of magna charta to the present moment. Our citizens have a right to petition for a change of their constitution, and, indeed, for a change in the form of government. Every decorous memorial should be received; but, when received, it is in the power of the House to dispose of it as it may deem proper. The motion to reject this petition was an incipient question, and, in his opinion, should take precedence. Mr. WISE was for sustaining the motion to reconsider; and, for one, could testify that he had voted under a misapprehension. In voting for the motion to consider the petition, he thought he was voting to have a direct decision of the House on the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina. He was intending to bring the House also to a direct decision of the question, and had no idea after the House had decided it would consider the petition, that the consideration itself would be evaded. Mr. W. had misapprehended in another particular. He had not understood the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina to be to consider the petition to-day, but to consider his motion to reject the petition, which was what Mr. W. wished to consider. So help him God, he never wished to consider the petition of an incendiary, but he would consider the motion to reject the petition, and he warned the gentleman from South Carolina that these were the means of evading his motion. Mr. HAMMOND said it had been far from his intention, when he made the motion he did, to throw a firebrand into that House. On the contrary, he had hoped by it to exclude one from the House. He thought the motion a very simple and direct one; and, ignorant as he was of the rules of the House, he had no idea that the House had it not in its power to protect its own dignity, and the feelings of its members, by rejecting instanter any thing calculated to affect either the one or the other. If the House had no such rule, the rule of common sense ought to govern it. Mr. PIERCE, of New Hampshire, said he had no disposition to discuss the merits of this DECEMBER, 1835.] Slavery in the District of Columbia. [H. OF R. was a foul and infamous calumny, and those who uttered it knew it to be such when they uttered it. Mr. HOWARD said, in order to check even himself in debate, and with a view, if he could, to obtain the opinion of the House, whether in the outset he was right or not, he would move to lay the motion of his honorable colleague, (Mr. THOMAS,) from whom it gave him great pain to differ, on the table. The question to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, was decided in the affirmativeayes 119, noes 72. MONDAY, December 21. Slavery in the District of Columbia. The House resumed the consideration of the petition from sundry inhabitants of the town of Wrentham, in Massachusetts, praying the abolition of slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia. deeply exciting question at any time, and his The motion to reject the petition still pend Mr. OWENS rose to address the House; but, Mr. PINCKNEY expressed a hope that the subject would be suspended, in order to present petitions and memorials. Mr. OWENS said he rose for the purpose of endeavoring to reconcile the conflicting opinions of gentlemen on all sides, and to submit certain propositions, which, he trusted, if the House would accept, would put to rest this agitating, delicate, and dangerous question. It was useless for him to regret that this question had been brought before the House. It was useless to regret that this question had been the subject of discussion. The apple of discord had been thrown into the House. Mr. O. then sent the following resolutions to the Chair, which were read: Resolved, That, in the opinion of this House, the question of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia ought not to be entertained by Congress. And be it further resolved, That in case any petitions, praying the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia be hereafter presented, it is the deliberate opinion of this House that the same ought to be laid on the table without reading. Mr. PICKENS said he would confine himself to what had been thrown out by the gentleman from New York. That gentleman had asked, why was it that discussion was desired upon that floor? and intimated that certain fanatics, as well in the South as in the North, desired to agitate this question. Mr. P. desired to take that opportunity to throw back the insinuation with scorn and contempt. Sir, said Mr. P., we do desire to agitate this question. We desire The question being taken on the motion to it, because we believe we have been foully lay the petition, and all the motions relating to slandered before the world; and I stand here it, on the table, it was decided in the affirmative prepared, at any time when the question shall-yeas 140, nays 76. come up, to vindicate the institutions of the So the petition, and all the motions dependpeople I have the honor in part to represent, ing thereon, were ordered to lie upon the from the foul aspersion and calumny thrown table. upon them. These are the motives which prompt us to desire discussion. He had heard some insinuations thrown out from higher quarters than the gentleman from New York, that certain gentlemen of the South, belonging to a certain party, desired the discussion of this question to advance the interests of a particular individual; and he would again repeat that it Mr. PATTON called up the motion made by him on Friday last, to reconsider the vote of the House, by which a petition for the abolition of slavery in the District, presented by a gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. BRIGGS,) was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. The motion having been taken up, H. OF R.] Slavery in the District of Columbia. [DECEMBER, 1835. slavery in the District of Columbia. Let it be shown, if it be so, that there is such a majority opposed to an interference with slavery in this District, not upon considerations merely temporary, and influenced by existing political circumstances, but upon those high and paramount considerations which belong to the great rights of property, as well as individual and political safety, which are connected with it. Mr. PATTON said that the vote which had | are making to interfere with the subject of been just taken against suspending the rules for the purpose of taking up the resolution offered by the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. OWENS,) must have convinced the House, and especially those gentlemen from the South who had voted for laying the former petition on the table, inconsistently with their vote on Friday last upon the same proposition, of the futility of any such scheme as had been proposed for procuring a direct vote of the House upon the principles involved in the petitions that had been offered, and would continue to be offered, praying the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. Those with whom he felt and acted on this question gave this apparently ⚫ inconsistent vote under the belief that there would be no difficulty in suspending the rules to take up the proposition of the gentleman from Georgia. They so calculated, and were deceived or mistaken. I, said Mr. P., had no confidence in such calculation, and was not mistaken. That vote, said Mr. P., I think, has further demonstrated that it is idle to attempt to avoid this subject by any parliamentary manœuvre, and that the only way of obtaining a direct vote upon the great and interesting questions embraced by them, is by making a proposition presenting the question growing out of the petitions in connection with the petitions themselves. Mr. ADAMS said he hoped the motion to reconsider this vote would not prevail; and he expressed this hope for the very reason which the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. PATTON) had assigned for voting in favor of the motion. It appears to me (said Mr. A.) that the only way of getting this question from the view of the House and of the nation, is to dispose of all petitions on the subject in the same way. This is not a new opinion; I assumed this position in my very first act as a member of this House, from the very time when I first took my seat as a member of the 22d Congress. At that time fifteen petitions were transmitted to me, not from my own constituents, but from citizens of the Society of Friends in the State of Pennsylvania, with a request that I would present them to the House.~ Sir, I did so in homage to the sacred right of petition-a right which, in whatever manner it may be treated by other members of this House, shall never be treated by me other than with respect. But, not being in favor of the object of the to the country, that upon the supposition that these petitions had been transmitted to me under the expectation that I should present them, I felt it my duty to say, I should not support them. And, sir, the reason which I gave at that time for declining to support them was precisely the same reason which the gentleman from Virginia now gives for reconsidering this motion-namely, to keep the discussion of the subject out of the House. I said, sir, that I believed this discussion would be altogether unprofitable to the House and to the country; but, in deference to the sacred right of petition, I moved that these fifteen petitions, all of which were numerously signed, should be referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia, at the head of which was, at that time, a distinguished citizen of Virginia, now, I regret to say Mr. Speaker, it is necessary that this House should be apprised and fully impressed with the necessity of quieting the anxiety, the agita-petitions, I then gave notice to the House and tion, and the alarm for the institutions of the country, which are abroad in the land; and that as the means, perhaps the only means, of doing so, it should meet those questions directly, and dispose of them decisively and permanently. I am ready to meet these questions; and I believe I express the universal sentiment of the representation from the South, in saying they are ready to meet it; and while we do not desire discussion, and for one I will do nothing to provoke it, at the same time we will not, we cannot, we dare not, shrink from it, if it be forced upon us from other quarters. I prefer voting upon the questions at once, and without discussion, if possible. If this subject must be discussed, it ought to be discussed, and it is hoped will be discussed, in the spirit which ought to characterize members of the same political family, and alike imbued with the patriotic purpose of rendering permanent this great and glorious Union. Let the vote referring this petition be reconsidered, a reference made by inadvertence, and then the petition will be open again for consideration; and, in connection with it, let the principles involved in the petition be presented for the consideration and decision of the House in some form, which will show distinctly and unequivocally that a majority of the representatives of the people of the North, as well as of the South, are opposed to the schemes of the abolitionists, and also to the efforts which and the whole country has occasion to regret -no more. These petitions were thus referred, and, after a short period of time, the chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia made a report to this House, which report was read, and unanimously accepted; and nothing more has been heard of these petitions from that day to this. In taking the course I then took, I was not sustained by the unanimous voice of my own constituents; there were many among them, persons as respectable, and as entitled to consideration as any others, who disapproved of the course I pursued on that occasion. |