صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

which motion the yeas and nays were asked and ordered, and, being taken, were, yeas 63, nays 111. So the House refused to adjourn.

"Mr. (biddings inquired of the speaker whether, if the previous question was sustained, he would have an opportunity to defend himself.

"The Speaker. 'If the previous question is sustained, the rule of the House would require that the vote on the resolution be immediately taken.'

"Mr. Giddings. 'Would it not be a privileged question V

"The Speaker. 'In the opinion of the chair, the gentleman would have the right, if he desires it, to be heard now in his defense.'

"Mr. Giddings said he would ask of the House to fix a time for the consideration of this resolution.

"Mr. Botts hoped the House would allow the gentleman from Ohio to defend himself, if ho wished.

"Mr. Giddings wished the House to fix such a time as they thought proper. He would say two weeks from this day. He did not suppose the House would force him into his defense now."

The House then became involved in a point of order, and a decision was made by the speaker that the demand for the previous question could not be entertained, because the gentleman arraigned asked a postponement of his trial; and, if the previous question should be entertained by the chair, and demanded by the House, it would deny the member that privilege. An appeal was taken from this decision, and while it was yet pending the House adjourned.

On the following day, Tuesday, the 22d of March, 1842, the subject came up as a question of privilege. The decision of the speaker was reversed, and the House decided that the previous question should be entertained.

Mr. Weller now offered to withdraw the demand for the previous question, so that Mr. Giddings might be heard, with the understanding that, after the defense was closed, the vote should immediately bo taken, without further debate. The speaker declared that the demand must be withdrawn unconditionally, or not at all. Mr. Weller declining so to withdraw it, Mr. Giddings rose and addressed the speaker, who called him to order, on the ground that the House had reversed the decision of the chair, and had thus decided that the rules applicable to the previous question should be rigidly enforced. Mr. Triplett moved that Mr. Giddings be heard in his defense, but the speaker declared that that object could only be effected by a suspension of the rules. The demand for the previous question was then seconded, and the House decided that the main question, which was on the adoption of the resolution, should be taken. The record then says:

"Mr. Weller moved that the rules of the House be suspended, for the purpose of enabling his colleague [Mr. Giddings] to be heard now, if he desired it.

"Mr. Barnard. i I hope not.,

"Mr. Everett. i It is a matter of right, if it is any thing.'

"Mr. Stanley. i I hope no objection will be made.'

"The speaker said that the House having decided that the forty-fifth rule was imperative, and should be rigorously executed, no motion, in the opinion of the chair, would now be in order, except a motion to adjourn, or to lay the whole subject on the table.

"Mr. Weller. i My motion is a motion to suspend the rules.,

"The speaker decided that that motion could not be entertained; that the previous question having been seconded, and the main question ordered, no motion could intervene between that and the taking of the main question, except a motion to adjourn and a motion to lay on the table.

"Mr. Triplett said he would make this specific motion to the House: that the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Giddings] be now heard in his defense; and inquired, i Will the speaker put the motion ?,

"The Speaker. i The speaker will not put it. It is not in order.'

"Mr. Triplett. i Then I move to suspend all the rules, right or wrong, that this specific motion may be put.'

"The Speaker. i The chair has already decided that that motion is not in order.'"

An appeal was taken from this decision, which, however, was affirmed by the House. Motions were made that Mr. Giddings should, if he desired to speak, be heard by general consent; but he declined to rise. Mr. Adams moved to lay the ulation therein. At a subsequent period he introduced the following declaratory resolutions, which the House ordered to be laid upon the table:

[graphic]

"Resolved, That, prior to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, each of the several states composing this Union possessed exclusive jurisdiction over the institution of slavery within its own territory, with power to continue or abolish it at pleasure.

"That, by adopting the Federal Constitution, no portion of the powers aforesaid were delegated to the Federal government

"That the existence, maintenance, and continuance of slavery must depend exclusively upon the power and authority of the states in which it is situated.

"That the Federal government, possessing no powers except those delegated by the several states, is clearly destitute of all authority to establish, support, extend, or perpetuate slavery.

"That all attempts of the executive and of Congress to associate a foreign slave-holding people in making and administering the laws of this nation are in palpable violation of the Constitution, destructive to the interests and the honor of the free states, and will constitute an outrage upon the rights and the honor of those states, unequaled in the history of civilized government.

"That no act of the Federal government can impose any obligation whatever upon the free states to unite with Texas upon terms so unequal and unjust, and so palpably opposed to their constitutional rights, and subversive of their reserved powers.

"That a voluntary surrender by the free states of their interests, their political rights, and their sacred honor, to the keeping of slaveholders, would prove them unworthy of the trust reposed in them by their Revolutionary ancestors."

He was one of the fourteen who voted against the act of the 13th of May, declaring the existence of a state of war with Mexico [see title, Robert C. Wintiirop], and he has since then uniformly voted against all supplies and appropriations for its prosecution.

He introduced, in 1842, theirs/ petition ever presented to Congress, calling its attention to the wheat-growing interests of the Northwest, and asking the adoption of such measures as would procure the admission of our wheat into foreign ports on terms of reciprocity. The petition came from a number of gentlemen of Warren, in the county of Trumbul}, Ohio. A select committee was appointed, which had not discharged its duties when, in consequence of the vote of censure, Mr. Giddings resigned his seat. - ,

[graphic]

He has sustained river and harbor appropriations in no sectional spirit, but upon the ground that, while the West cheerfully contributed its wealth and influence to support, maintain, and protect Atlantic interests, it demanded, in return, the same generous support for the commerce of the Lakes.

Though opposed in the twenty-eighth Congress to giving the notice to Great Britain to terminate the joint occupation of the Oregon Territory, he was in favor of it in the twenty-ninth. His reasons were these: that the policy of the nation, since the expiration of the twenty-eighth Congress, had been changed, and, with it, the essential elements of our government had been changed, and its fundamental principles overthrown. By the annexation of Texas, he argued, the balance of power had been taken from the northern section of the Union, and had rendered the whole of Oregon necessary to its restoration. He did not believe that the giving the notice would produce war, but was inclined to the opinion that war would be the result of the subsequent step—that is to say, of taking possession of the whole territory. But even this issue, with an its horrors, revolting as they were to the feelings of humanity, he would prefer, rather than see the people sit down in quiet indifference under the slave-holding power.

It is known that, at the commencement of the present session of Congress, he separated from the great body of the Whig party on the question of the election of speaker. He gives this explanation: that Mr. Winthrop, during the twenty-ninth Congress, serving on the Committee of Ways and Means, had united in reporting all the various appropriations for carrying on the war against Mexico. Believing, as Mr. Giddings does, that that war is unnecessary and unjust, and that the invasion of Mexico is an outrage upon her people, he regards every life sacrificed in its prosecution as murder, attended with all the moral guilt which attaches to that crime. He considers that all who aid in any degree in maintaining or supporting the war, are ulation therein. At a subsequent period he introduced the following declaratory resolutions, which the House ordered to be laid upon the table:

"Resolved, That, prior to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, each of the several states composing this Union possessed exclusive jurisdiction over the institution of slavery within its own territory, with power to continue or abolish it at pleasure.

"That, by adopting the Federal Constitution, no portion of the powers aforesaid were delegated to the Federal firovernment.

"That the existence, maintenance, and continuance of slavery must depend exclusively upon the power and authority of the states in which it is situated.

"That the Federal government, possessing no powers except those delegated by the several states, is clearly destitute of all authority to establish, support, extend, or perpetuate slavery.

"That all attempts of the executive and of Congress to associate a foreign slave-holding people in making and administering the laws of this nation are in palpable violation of the Constitution, destructive to the interests and the honor of the free states, and will constitute an outrage upon the rights and the honor of those states, unequaled in the history of civilized government.

"That no act of the Federal government can impose any obligation whatever upon the free states to unite with Texas upon terms so unequal and unjust, and so palpably opposed to their constitutional rights, and subversive of their reserved powers.

"That a voluntary surrender by the free states of their interests, their political rights, and their sacred honor, to the keeping of slaveholders, would prove them unworthy of the trust reposed in them by their Revolutionary ancestors."

He was one of the fourteen who voted against the act of the 13th of May, declaring the existence of a state of war with Mexico [see title, Robert C. Winthrop], and he has since then uniformly voted against all supplies and appropriations for its prosecution.

He introduced, in 1812, the first petition ever presented to Congress, calling its attention to the wheat-growing interests of the Northwest, and asking the adoption of such measures as

« السابقةمتابعة »