Mr. ARCHER followed, and contended that Randolph, J. Reed, Rencher, Root, Russel, the House did not constitutionally possess the Semmes, W. B. Shepard, A. H. Shepperd, power to punish in the present case. Slade, Smith, Southard, Spence, Stewart, Mr. KERR, of Maryland, next addressed the Storrs, Sutherland, Taylor, Tompkins, Tracy, House in support of the right to punish for the Vance, Verplanck, Vinton, Wardwell, Washcontempt which he maintained had been comington, Watmough, Wilkin, Wheeler, Elisha mitted by the accused in the assault upon Mr. Whittlesey, F. Whittlesey, E. D. White, WickSTANBERY. liffe, Williams, and Young-106. Mr. DICKSON, of New York, obtained the NAYS-Messrs. Alexander, R. Allen, Anfloor at six o'clock. derson, Angel, Archer, Ashley, J. Bates, Mr. SEMMES moved a postponement of Beardsley, Bell, Bergen, Bethune, J. Blair, further proceedings till Monday, but the mo- Boon, Bouck, Bouldin, John Brodhead, J. C. tion was negatived without a division. Brodhead, Bucher, Cambreleng, Carr, Carson, Mr. DICKERSON then entered into an ar- Chandler, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Connor, gument to show, in the first place, the posses Craig, Davenport, Dayan, Doubleday, Drayton, sion of a power by the House to punish for a Fitzgerald, Ford, Foster, Gaither, Gilmore, breach of privilege; and, in the next place, the Gordon, T. H. Hall, W. Hall, Hammons, Harnecessity of exercising it in the present in-per, Hawes, Hawkins, Hoffman, Holland, Horn, Hubbard, Jarvis, Jewett, R. M. John stance. Mr. D. concluded at about eight o'clock-son, C. Johnson, C. C. Jolinston, Kavanagh, when A. King, J. King, Lamar, Lansing, Leavitt, Mr. EVANS, of Maine, asked for the ayes Lecompte, Lent, Lewis, Lyon, Mann, Mardis, and noes on the question of the amendment of Mason, McCarty, Wm. McCoy, McIntire, G. Mr. HUNTINGTON to declare the accused guil- E. Mitchell, T. R. Mitchell, Muhlenberg, ty of a contempt, and a violation of the privi- Nuckolls, Pierson, Plummer, Polk, E. Č. leges of the House. The call being sustained, by the requisite number, they were ordered. Reed, Roane, Soule, Speight, Standifer, Stephens, F. Thomas, P Thomas, W. Thompson, J. Thomson, Ward, Wayne, Weeks, and Worthington—89. Mr. EVERETT, of Vermont,-moved a call of the House, upon which question, likewise, So Samuel Houston was declared guilty of a Mr. PoLK asked for the yeas and nays, which contempt, and of a violation of the privileges were ordered and taken, when the call was or- of the House. dered by a vote of ayes 166, noes 65. The question was then of agreeing to the The call was then proceeded in, and conti-resolution as amended, which was carried in nued until 193 members answered to their the affirmative. names. Mr. CLAY, of Alabama, offered an amendMr. WICKLIFFE moved a suspension of the ment, declaring it to be inexpedient to proceed call, and, upon taking the vote upon this mo- further in the charge against Samuel Huu>ton, tion, Mr. TAYLOR, of New York, and Mr. Mc-and that he forthwith be discharged from the INTYRE, of Maine, were appointed tellers. custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. The proposition was negatived, ayes 83— Mr. CLAY shortly observed, in support of noes 90. his motion, that the accused had already been The call was renewed, and several members in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms for a were excused on account of sickness, or from month, which he thought, a sufficient punishother unavoidable or necessary causes of ab.ment. Mr. HUNTINGTON moved to amend, by striking out all after the word Resolved, and inserting, That Saml. Houston be brought to the bar of the House on Monday next at 12 o'clock, and be there reprimanded by the SPEAKER, for the contempt and violation of the privileges of the House, of which he has been guilty; and that he be then discharged from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Resolved, That Samuel Houston be excluded from the exercise of the privilege conferred by the 13th standing rule of the House. YEAS-Messrs. Adams, C. Allan, Allison, Appleton, Armstrong, Arnold, Babcock, Banks, J. Barbour, Barnwell, Barringer, Barstow, I. C. Bates. John Blair, Briggs, Bullard, Burd, Burges, Cahoon, Choate, Coke, L. Condict, S. Condi, E. Cooke, B. Cooke, Corwin, Coul ter, Crane, Crawford, Creighton, Daniel, J. Da- Mr. DAVIS, of South Carolina, asked if the vis, W. R. Davis, Dearborn, Denny, Dewart, effect of the second resolution would not be Dickson, Doddridge, Duncan, Ellsworth, G. E-to repeal the rule of the House, and whether, vans, J. Evans, E. Everett, H. Everett, Felder, as such, it would not require a vote of twoGrennell, Griffin, Heister, Hodges, Hughes, thirds." Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Irvin, Jenifer, The SPEAKER referred to the rule in Kendall, Kennon, H. King, Kerr, Letcher, question, and to the 104th rule of the House, Marshall, Maxwell, R. McCoy, McDuffie, Mc and decided that the resolution went to change Kay, McKennon, Mercer, Milligan, Newnan, at least partially, the rule, and would of course Newton, Pearce, Pendleton, Pitcher, Potts, require a vote of two-thirds, Mr. MERCER appealed from the decision of the Chair. Some further remarks were made by WICK LIFFE, and Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. LAMAR asked for the ayes and noes on the question of the appeal, and they were ordered. The SPEAKER stated the case to the House, and the reasons which had actuated the Chair in its decision. YEAS-Messrs. Adams, C. Allan, Allison, Mr. MERCER, Mr. McDUFFIE, and Mr. Appleton, Armstrong, Arnold, Babcock, Banks, ADAMS, contended that the rule in question J. S. Barbour, Barnwell, Barringer, Barstow, did not apply to the resolution offered by Mr. L. C. Bates, James Blair, Briggs, Bullard, Burd, HUNTINGTON. Burges, Cahoon, Choate, Coke, Collier, L. Mr. WAYNE, Mr. SUTHERLAND, Mr. Condict, S. Condit, E. Cooke, B. Cooke, VINTON, and Mr. ARCHER, followed in a Corwin, Coulter, Crane, Crawford, Creighton, desultory discussion, and upon a vote the ap-Daniel, J. Davis, W. R. Davis, Dearborn, Denpeal was sustained; ayes 89, noes 106. ny, Dewart, Dickson, Doddrige, Duncan, Ells So the resolution was declared to be in or-worth, George Evans, J. Evans, E. Everett, H. der. The resolution of Mr. CLAY, and the amendment of Mr. HUNTINGTX, were then read. Mr. LAMAR asked for a division of the question upon the amendment. Mr. WICKLIFFE asked for the ayes and noes on the proposition to amend, and they were ordered. Everett, Felder, Grennell, Griffin, Heister, Mr. ARCHER asked the House to work out the proposition they had laid down, and to im prison the respondent. It would then be com. petent to try the question before a judicial tribunal, by a habeas corpus. A reprimand was the terror of school boys; and supposing Gen. NAYS-Messrs. Alexander,' R. Allen, AnHouston should refuse to receive it, how were derson, Angel, Archer, Ashley, J. Bates, they to proceed? Beardsley, Bell, Bergen, Bethune John Blair, Mr. HUNTINGTON said, that if the honora-Bouck, Bouldin, J. Brodhead, J. C. Brodhead, ble member wished to try the right of the Bucher, Cambreleng, Carr, Carson, Chandler, House, in such a way, he might do so by mov-Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Connor, Craig, Daing his proposition himself, as an amendment to venport, Dayan, Doubleday, Drayton, Fitzge the amendment then offered to the House; or rald, Ford, Foster, Gaither, G.lmore, Gordon, if he wished to send the matter to another tri T. H. Hall, Wm. Hall, Hammons, Harper, bunal, to see if they would sustain the rights of Hawes, Hawkins, Hoffman, Hogan, Holland, that House, it would be an easy thing to do Horn, Hubbard, Jars, Jewett, R. M. John that. Mr. H. objected to the words of the son, C. Johnson, C. C. Johnston, Kavanagh, gentleman from Virginia, that the proposition J. King, Lamar, Lansing, Leavitt, Lecompte, then offered, "looked like a wish to creep out" Lent, Lewis, Lyon, Mann, Mardis, Mason, Mcof the affair. So for from that, he had adopted Carty, Wm. McCoy, McIntire, T. R. Mitchell, the proposition as believing it to be the best Muhlenberg, Nuckolls, Pierson, Plummer, Polk, adapted to express the sense of the House up-E. C. Reed, Roane, Soule, Speight, Standifer, on this violation of its rights. Stephens, F. Thomas, P. Thomas, W ThompMr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, said he hoped son, J. Thomson, Ward, Wardwell, Wayne, the game would be played out. After having Weeks, Wheeler, Worthington.-89. convicted the accused on a charge which had So the resolution was agreed to. been characterized as one of a most flagitious Mr. CARSON expressed a hope that the kind, he could not conceive that it was an ade-second member of the amendment would not quate punishment merely to bring the accused be agreed to. He adverted to General Housto the bar of that House to receive a reprimand; ton's honorable character and conduct when a especially when the journals of the House would member of that House, and to the services he show a most respectable minority yote, to dis had rendered, and the wound he had received charge and exhonerate him altogether. As to in the defence of his country. the latter branch of the resolution, that might Mr. HUNTINGTON shortly urged the nebe considered, perhaps, as an adequate punish- cessity of acting upon this resolution, which ment, but could they carry it with effect if they had been agreed to, declaring the accused adopted it. Suppose the people of Tennessee guilty of a breach of privilege. should think proper to send Mr. Houston as Mr. CAMBRELENG hoped this part of the their representative to this House, would they amendment would be rejected; it transcended in that case be able to enforce their resolution even those powers which were exercised by the of exclusion? He trusted that some punishment British Parliament; according to the arbitrary rule there followed, the power of imprisonment Kay, McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, Newton, did not extend beyond the session; and he de- Pearce, Pendleton, Potts, Randolph, Reed, nied that the power of punishment in that House Root, Russel, Semmes, W. B. Shepard, Slade, could extend a moment farther; yet here it was Southard, Spence, Stewart, Storrs, Sutherland, sought to extend it to the life of the accused. Taylor, Tompkins, Tracy, Vance, Verplanck, After speaking in very high terms of the gene- Vinton, Washington, Watmough, Wilkin, E. ral character of Mr. Houston, Mr. C. concluded Whittlesey, F. Whittlesey, Wickliffe, Williams, by urging the House not to push their powers Young.-90. too far, or they might bring the matter to a place which they did not wish it to reach. NAYS-Messrs. Alexander, R. Allen, Ander. son, Angel, Archer, Ashley, J. Bates, Beardsley, Mr. COKE denied that the power which the Bell, Bergen, Bethune, James Blair, John House had exercised, was borrowed from the Blair, Bouck, Bouldin, J. Brodhead, J. C. practice of the British Parliament. The power Brodhead, Bucher, Burd, Cambreleng, Carr, it claimed was a natural right, and those rules, Carson, Chandler, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, from the benefit of one of which it was now Connor, Craig, Crawford, Davenport, Dayan, sought to exclude the accused, were the fruits Dewart, Doubleday, Drayton, Duncan, Fitzof its own legislation, made without the aid ei gerald, Ford, Foster, Gaither, Gilmore, Gor ther of the Senate or the Executive. No man don, T. H. Hall, W. Hall, Hammons, Harper, who read the constitution could deny the right Hawes, Hawkins, Hoffman, Hogan, Holland, of the House to prevent an individual from Horn, Hubbard, Ihrie, Jarvis, Jewett, R. M. walking on the outside of that bar. After some Johnson, C. Johnson, C. C. Johnston, Kavafurther remarks, Mr. C. concluded by contend-nagh, J. King, H. King, Lamar, Lansing, Leaing for the propriety of the exclusion of the ac- vitt, Lecompte, Lent, Lewis, Lyon, Mann, cused. That individual had walked round the Mardis, Mason, McCarty, W. McCoy, McIntire, House, ready armed, to attack one of its mem-T. R. Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Newnan, bers, and had been heard to declare, within a Nuckolls, Pierson, Pitcher, Plummer, Polk, E. few yards of the Speaker's chair."that he C. Reed, Rencher, Roane, A. H. Shepperd, would right the wrong wherever given, though Smith, Soule, Speight, Sandifer, Stephens, F. it were in the court of heaven." He thought Thomas, P. Thomas, W. Thompson, J. Thomhe should not have an opportunity of repeating son, Ward,¦Wardwell, Wayne, Weeks, Wheelthe offence. er, Worthington.-101. Mr. CRAIG followed, briefly, in deprecation of the proposition to exclude the accused. Mr. BLAIR said, he had hitherto voted against the accused, though his personal friend, because he thought he had been guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House; but he could go no farther; he could not vote for the proposition of exclusion. He thought enough had been done to sustain the character of the House, and the vindication of its rights; and there were circumstances in the case, which made it improper that a thing more than a nominal punishment should be awarded to the The resolution, as amended, was then agreed to by the following vote: YEAS-Messrs. Adams, C. Allan, Allison, Appleton, Armstrong, Babcock, Banks, J. S. Barbour, Barnwell, Barringer, Barstow, I. C. Bates, James Blair Briggs, Bullard, Burd, Burges, Cahoon, Choate, Coke, L. Condict, S. Condit, E. Cooke, B. Cooke, Corwin, Coulter, Crane, Crawford, Creighton, Damel, J. Davis, Dearborn, Denny, Dewart, Dickson, Doddridge Duncan, Ellsworth, G. Evans, J. Evans, E. Everett, H. Everest, Felder, Grennell, Griffin, Heister, Hodges, Hughes, Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Irvin, Jenifer, Kendall, Kerr, Letch Mr. CLAYTON briefly followed on the same er, Marshall, Maxwell, R. McCoy, McDuffie, side. McKay, McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, Newton, Mr. BURD contended that the House had Pearce, Pendleton, Potts, Randolph, J. Reed, not the power to exclude the accused from the Rencher, Russel, Semme-, W. B. Shepard, A. floor for a longer period than the duration of H. Shepperd, Slade, Smith, Southard, Stewthe present session, and was therefore opposed art, Storrs, Sutherland, Taylor, Tompkins, to the proposition. He thought the punish. Tracy, Vance, Verplanck, Vinton, Washingment already ordered fully sufficient. ton, Watmough, Wilkin, E. Whittlesey, F. The question was then taken, and the pro- Whittlesey, E. D. White, Wickliffe, Williams, position to exclude from the floor was nega. Young.-96. tived. accused. NAYS-Messrs. Alexander, R. Allen, AnYEAS-Messrs. Adams, C. Allan, Allison, Ap-derson, Angel, Archer, Arnold, J. Bates, pleton, Armstrong, Arnold, Babcock, Banks, J. Beardsley, Bell, Bergen, Bethune, John Blair, S. Barbour, Barnwell, Barringer, Barstow, I. Bouck, Bouldin, J. Broadhead, J. C. BroadC. Bates, Briggs, Bullard, Burges, Cahoon, head, Bucher, Cambreleng, Carr, Carson, Choate, Coke, Collier, L. Condict, S. Condit, Chandler, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Craig, E. Cooke, B. Cooke, Corwin, Coulter, Crane, Davenport, Doubleday, Drayton, Fitzgerald, Creighton, Daniel, J. Davis, Dearborn, Denny, Ford, Foster, Gaither, Gilmore, Gordon, T. Dickson, Doddridge, Ellsworth, G. Evans, E. H Hall, W. Hall, Hammons, Harper, Hawes, Everett, H. Everett, Felder, Grennell, Griffin, Hawkins, Hoffinan, Hogan, Holland, Horn, Heister, Hodges, Hughes, Huntington, Inger-Hubbard, Jarvis, Jewett, R. M. Johnson, C. C. soll, Irvin, Jenifer, Kendall, Kerr, Letcher, Johnston, Kavanagh, A. King, J. King, Lamar, Marshall, Maxwell, R. McCoy, McDuffie, Mc. Lansing, Leavitt, Lecompte, Lent, Lewis, Mann, Mardis, Mason, McCarty, W. McCoy, sion which the House had come to upon the McIntire, T. R. Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Nuck-subject. olls, Pierson, l'olk, E. C. Beed, Roane, Speight] Mr. McDUFFIE said, that this appeared to Standifer, Stephens, F. Thomas, P. Thomas, him the most unexceptionable mode of doing W. Thompson, J. Thomson, Ward, Wardwell, that which the accused had an undoubted right Wayne, Weeks, Wheeler, Worthington-84. to do-namely, the right to say why the House Mr. POLK presented to the House the origi- should not pronounce its judgment on him. nals of the opinion of the members of Gene- Mr. ARCHER said, it was a matter of perfect ral Washington's cabinet on the apportionment indifference to the accused whether the paper bill of 1792, which he said he had obtained was received or not, since he would have an from a gentleman of Boston; they were order- opportunity of speaking its contents when ed to be printed. brought to the bar of the House, unless it was The House then, at nearly 11 o'clock, ad-meant to extend the privileges of the House so journed till Monday. MONDAY, MAY 14. far as to deny the accused a right which would be allowed him before any tribunal in the land. It was, indeed, beyond the power of the House to prevent the contents of that paper from The time having arrived for General Honston to be conducted to the bar to receive the judg-being known to the community, who would ment of the House, judge of the propriety of their conduct who Mr. ARCHER, on behalf of the accused, ten dered a paper for perusal, and moved that it be read. He observed, that Mr. Houston was of opinion, that he was entitled to state, orally, why judgment should not be pronounced against him, but preferred submitting his remarks were received it would be entered on the jourin writing. The paper was couched in respect-nal. ful terms, and the accused wished it read prior to his appearing at the bar for judgment. Mr. BURGES and Mr. EVERETT, of Mas sachusetts, severally asked for information as to the contents of the paper. The SPEAKER said, not unless it should be so ordered by the House. M. ARCHER said, it was intended to follow up the motion to read, by a motion to enter it upon the journal. The paper was then read. To the Honorable, the House of Representatives of the United States. The accused, now at the bar of the House, asks leave respectfully to state, That he understands he is now brought be Was he to submit in silence to such a sentence, it might, imply that he recognised the authority of the House to impose it. Mr. ARCHER said, he would very briefly comply with the request of the gentleman from Rhode Island. The accused individual knowing that that was the hour when he was to be brought to the bar to receive the judgment awarded by the House, had presumed that when called to the bar it was part of his constitution.) al privilege, as a citizen, to state to the House, fore the House, to receive a reprimand from in respectful terms, some considerations, in the the Speaker, in exécution of the sentence proway of protest, not against the propriety of the nounced upon him, House punishing at all, but against the peculiar mode of punishment which it had thought proper to adopt. The accused had, however, believed it would be more respectful to express He cannot consent that it shall be thus imthose considerations in writing, and to present plied. He considers it a mode of punishment them to the House, before being brought to the unknown to our laws, and, if not forbidden by bar. The paper was couched in the most re. the prohibition of the constitution against "unspectful terms, and contained only those consi. usual punishments," yet inconsistent with the derations, which he believed he had a constitu- spirit of our institutions, and unfit to be inflicttional right to submit, orally, at the bar. After ed upon a free citizen. the House had heard the paper read, it might take such order thereupon as it might deem propér. He thinks proper to add, in making this declaration, that he has been unwilling to trouble the House. That though he believes the whole proceed. ing against him, as well as the sentence he now objects to, unwarranted by the constitution of his country, yet circumstances may exist to Mr. BARRINGER objected to the reading of the paper. He understood it to be presented from the accused, as a sort of protest against the judgment of the House. Without a single justify or excuse a citizen in determining (as he vindictive feeling against the accused, he (Mr. has done on this occasion) to suffer in silent paB.) felt it his duty to state, after all that had passed, that there had been extended to the tience, whatever the House may think proper SAMUEL HOUSTON. accused all the lenity, and courtesy, and every manifestation of respect which was possible.He had, both by himself and his counsel, pro- Mr. ARCHER then moved, that when the tested against the proceedings of the House, accused was brought to the bar, he should be and pleaded against its jurisdiction; it was, in allowed to tender that paper to the House, and his opinion, asking a little too much, to ask that its contents, as part of the trial, should beleave at this time, to protest against the conclu- entered on the journals of the House. to enforce. Mr. EVERETT suggested that the motion should be divided, as to that part relative to the entry on the journals. Mr. ARCHER so modified his resolution, and it was agreed to. The accused was then conducted to the bar by the Sergeant-at-Arms, and in pursuance of the permission granted by the previous resolution, submitted this paper to the House. It was again read by the clerk. The SPEAKER then addressed Mr. Houston, as follows: SAMUEL HOUSTON: I am prepared to trust, not doubting, that had you at the time, considered the act of violence which you have committed in the light in which it has been regarded by the House, you would have been spared its disapprobation and censure, and 1, the duty, of declaring to you, the result of it. I forbear to say more, than to pronounce the judgment of the House, which is, that you have been guilty of a high breach of its privileges, and that you be reprimanded therefor at its bar by the Speaker; and in obedience to the order of the House, I do reprimand you accordingly. You will now be conducted from the bar of the House, and discharged from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Mr. HOUSTON was then conducted from On motion of Mr. ARCHER, the paper offered by Mr. Houston, was ordered to be entered on the journal of the House. You have been charged with a violation of the rights and privileges of the House of Re. presentatives, in having offered personal violence to one of its members, for words spoken in debate! In exercising the high and delicate power, of ascertaining and vindicating their the bar. own privileges, the House have proceeded throughout this investigation, and in relation to your individual rights, with all that deliberation and caution which ought to characterize the dignified and moral justice of such an assembly. You have been heard in person in your de . fence; you have been ably and eloquently defended by eminent counsel, and every facility afforded you, to place your cause fully and fairly before the House, and to urge upon its consuleration, matters of principle as well as fact, in explanation and justification of your conduct. Mr. STANBERY then asked the consent of the House to offer a resolution. An objection being made, Mr. STANBERY tated the substance of the resolution. It was for the appointment of a Select Committee, to inquire whether the late Secretary of War, Mr. John H. Eaton, had offered a fraudulent contract for the supply of rations to the emigrating Indians, and whether General Houston had endeavored fraudulently' to obtain such contract. Whatever the motives or causes may have Mr. STANBERRY moved to suspend the been, which led to the act of violence commit-rule, and upon this, asked for the yeas and ted by you, your conduct has been pronounced nays, which were ordered. by the solemn judgment of the House, to be a high breach of their rights and privileges, and to demand their marked disapprobation and censure. The rule was suspended, ayes 169, noes 13. lution. Mr. CARSON adverted to the practice of If, in fulfilling the order of the House, I were the chair to appoint the member moving for a called upon as its presiding officer, to repri- select committee, to the station of head of it; mand an individual, uneducated and uninform-and suggested to the member from Ohio, (Mr. ed, it might be expected, that I should endea- STANBERY,) whether considering the peculiar vor, as far as I was able, to impress upon him, situation in which he was placed, it would be the importance and propriety, of seducusly in accordance with his feelings to serve on the guarding from violation, the rights and privi- committee. leges secured to the members of the House by Mr. STANBERRY said, he did not know our invaluable constitution; but when address- that he stood in a position which could disqualing a citizen of your character and intelligence,ify him as chairman; he owed no malice to the and one who has himself been honored by the accused; and should feel gratified if circumpeople with a seat in this House, it cannot be stances should so turn out as to enable him to necessary, that I should add to the duty en- pronounce the accused parties innocent of the joined upon me, by dwelling upon the charac fraud, charged. ter or consequences of the offence with which Mr. POLK said, he hoped the resolution you have been charged and found guilty. would be sustained. He had, on a former ocWhatever has a tendency to impair the free-casion, announced his intention to present a dom of debate in this House, a freedom no les similar resolution; and he should have done so, saered than the authority of the constitution it- if the member from Ohio had not. He was inself, or to detract from the independence of duced to do this, not only as due to the adminthe Representatives of the people, in the right-istration, but to the American people. He ful discharge of their bigh functions, you are hoped it would be cheerfully sustained by the no doubt sensible, must in the same proportion, House; and he was convinced that no harm weaken and degrade not only the legislature of would result to the characters of the parties the nation itself, but the character of our free implicated in the supposed fraud. institutions. Mr. CARSON said, it was due to the memYour own mind will suggest to you probably [ber from Ohio, to say that he did not impute more suitable reflections, than any thing which any thing as to his motives. He had merely I can say, could convey. To those reflections, suggested that it could hardly be consistent |
