gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. CARTTER,] introduced to the committee on a former occasion, was the business before the committee as unfinished business at its last session. The Chair decided against him; and from that decision an appeal was taken, and the committee overruled the Chair. The Chair is therefore constrained to say that the resolution is now before the committee as the unfinished business.

derstand this matter, it seems to be conceded upon all hands, that if the subject-matter of this thing shall be fairly before the committee-that is, the subject out of which the resolution may have legitimately grown, or may legitimately grow-that then the resolution may be acted on, and properly reported to the House. That being conceded, the only question that remains for us to inquire into is simply whether there is now legally before this Mr. STANTON. I am not disposed to appeal committee any subject-matter out of which a resfrom the decision of the Chair that the President'solution of this sort can come? The House has message is not a part of the question before the committee, being satisfied that the statement of the Chairman cannot alter the facts.

Mr. DISNEY. Had it been the pleasure of the House on yesterday to have permitted me to speak when I first obtained the floor, I should probably then have said much, very much, in relation to the merits of the resolution before the committee, which I shall now refrain from uttering. I shall now abstain from presenting any extended views. I see around me indications too evident to allow me to doubt the propriety and, indeed, absolute necessity of action instead of debate. Influenced by considerations of this sort, and animated by a desire to bring this matter to a final decision, I will not avail myself of the privilege of discussion even to the extent which I may under the resolution, limited as it is to one half hour. I propose to trespass upon the patience of the committee but for a very brief period indeed; but I regret the|| conclusions to which I have been forced to come in this respect, and the mode in which circumstances will compel me to handle the subject, the less, because, independently of all other incidental questions and of the various views in which this matter may be presented, the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GENTRY] has in fact practically presented the entire actual question before the House for its decision. It is a wise and safe rule which teaches us that when we have one point upon which a case may be properly decided, we never should seek for another. But as I have obtained the floor, and may, under the rules, occupy the attention of the committee for a few moments, I will take the occasion, before I sit down, to utter some sentiments. It may be that they are peculiar to myself; that may be so; they are at least quite different from the general course of remark I heard yesterday uttered in this Hall-I allude, sir, to the idea of intervention. And here, once for all, let me say in advance, that intervention stalks no spectre in my path. It cannot startle me from my notions of right and wrong; but as I shall say something upon this part of the matter before I take my seat, I will, in the first place, ask leave to address myself to some of the questions of order, which I see evidently will, when this committee rises, be raised in the House for its decision. First, it is objected that this resolution is not properly before the committee. Now, every one at all familiar with parliamentary law and the history of the origin of committees, knows that all committees, of whatever character, whether special, select, or standing, have full power to act in each and every case upon such subjects as may be embraced in the general scope of the authority conferred upon them by the rule or order creating and establishing them, as well as in all other matters which may be specially referred to them by order of the House. Committees of the Whole were constituted for particular purposes. They were to relieve the legislative body from the rigor of the common laws, if I may so express myself; to place the House in its undress; to permit it to consider the subject on two different occasions-the one with freedom and with ease, unrestrained and untied down by these formal ceremonies or principles of the law; and in the other case, to consider it according to the rules and ceremonies which custom, reason, and, I may add, common sense combined, have established for the government of legislative bodies. The very essence and existence of committees of the whole are to be found in the freedom with which you can discuss and handle subjects. One attribute of all committees is, that when any particular subject may have been referred to them, they may act with regard to it, and, in the language of the law, report upon it either by bill or otherwise. Read the Manual, and you will find that when any paper or subject is referred to the committee, they may originate matter concerning it, either by resolution or by bill, and report it to the body who has appointed such committee. In truth, as I un

decided this question. I flatter myself, if I had
been heard upon this subject yesterday, that I
could have convinced gentlemen that the introduc-
tion of the resolution was right, because such sub-
ject-matter did exist; but I am saved the necessity
of the attempt to-day, by the decision which this
House came to this morning, in relation to a res-
olution offered by the gentleman from North Car-
olina, [Mr. CLINGMAN,] by and in which you as-
serted and decided that so much of the President's
message as relates to Louis Kossuth, was and is
before this committee, and that out of it this reso-
lution has grown. I say, that point is already
decided by the resolution of the gentleman from
North Carolina; but I waive all these positions.
They are not necessary or essential to the decision
of this question. The latitude to which I have
adverted, as belonging to committees of the whole,
is established and known to the law. Still you,
by your usages and rules, have not been content
with that, but have gone further, and created an-
other committee of the whole, with higher and
broader privileges, and less restrained in regard to
the freedom of debate, or its mode and manner of
procedure. You have not only a Committee of
the Whole, but you have a Committee of the
Whole on the state of the Union-a committee
unknown to the common law, and in which you
exercise a latitude of debate sanctioned by imme-
morial usage unknown even to those allowed even
in committees of the whole.

the propriety of recommending to the House this matter. But, sir, I stated, when I got up, I had no intention of trespassing long upon the attention of the committee. I feel myself, and I know that in that feeling I participate with a vast majority of the members of this House, that the committee will prefer action rather than either words or ideas.

But before I take my seat, I must say that I feel also that, in justice to myself, I ought to enter my dissent from the doctrines and opinions advanced upon this floor yesterday in reference to the reception of this distinguished person. It has been intimated that favorable action upon this poor resolution involves some matter of principle-that it will commit the House to the doctrines advanced by Louis Kossuth. I was pleased to hear the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations admit that, in his judgment, it involved no such committal. Nor does it. I apprehend that this is the sound conclusion to which every gentleman will come, and must come, who sits down and calmly looks over the whole matter. What are the facts before us in regard to this subject? You have invited him to your country; you have passed resolutions inviting him to your seat of Government; and now the only question before this committee to decide is, whether you will appoint a committee of a few gentlemen as a part of the arrangement to introduce him? It is objected by some that he is a foreigner, and they do not desire to be taught the doctrines of republicanism, or the true policy of our foreign relations, or the principles of our institutions of government, by foreigners. How very alarming! how well founded! But, really, is there anything to startle us from our propriety? What are the bare and naked facts? Here comes a man under the circumstances I have stated-a man who needs no eulogy from my hands. I attempt no euulogy upon Louis Kossuth. I make none. No, sir; no. No, I shall do no such silly, foolish thing. He is too far beyond my power of praise. He has written his own eulogy. He has written his historic page of the present age, and he has written it in the broad character of living, enduring light, which will be read as long as the history of the human race is read. He is beyond all eulogy at my hands. His fame will be perpetual, no matter what may be the action which we may take in regard to this petty resolution. I say petty, because it contemplates a ceremony involving nothing of principle, but, as the gifted gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GENTRY] so forcibly and eloquently said, does involve somewhat of our own dignity.

What is your every-day practice, no matter what particular subject may be the matter pend-name-he has written himself a MAN upon the ing before the committee? A gentleman rises in his place, and presents his views upon any subject within the range of human comprehension. He does not talk at all about the matter upon which he is going to vote. He is tied down by none of the rules of order as generally known to the common law. He is not put down by those motions and actions which usually govern committees of the whole. As we have been told here, the practice of the House has been to originate bills in this committee, as in the case stated by the gentleman of a bill being introduced in the committee for the admission of California. It originated in the committee, consequently in conformity to the general provisions to which I have alluded before in regard to the powers of the committee. Then, in my judgment, it is sufficient to rest this matter upon the general fact, that the Committee of the Whole upon the state of the Union, having the Union generally under consideration, and this matter pertaining to the official action of the Government-having relation to the Government as a Government-is within the scope and authority of the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. But I will not trespass further upon this point. Time flies rapidly. Another objection is raised, and it is, that the resolution proposes to refer a subject to the action of another committee. I apprehend that the gentlemen who read that resolution carefully will find it proposes no such thing. It does not propose that this committee shall refer any subject to the action of another committee; for I admit, in that it is well established that no committee-neither the Committee of the Whole, nor any standing or select committee-can refer a matter of which it has the charge to any other committee. Does this resolution propose to do any such thing? I apprehend not. What is that resolution when fairly and fully written out? "Resolved by the House of Representatives, That a committee be appointed," &c. I know not whether the technical phraseology is in the resolution or not; but if it be there, gentlemen will discover afterwards, upon the very face of the resolution, that it does not propose that this committee shall refer this matter to another committee; but it proposes that the House shall refer this subject to the action of the proposed committee-a committee to be raised by the order of the House. This committee is only discussing

But

It is objected that he, a stranger, comes forward and advocates doctrines gentlemen cannot assent to. Sir, he would be false to his mission, coming here to beg for his suffering and drown-trodden country, if he did not seek to obtain your aid by every means and argument that the powers of his mighty intellect could suggest. Great as Louis Kossuth is, he comes here in a mightier character than even all of his own ennobling qualities can make him. He comes here as the representative of a people. It is a nation that talks to you when Kossuth speaks. Hungary appeals to you through him. Read the page of history from the earliest time, and nothing is more common than missions for assistance from one people to another. our Government is peculiar. On the continent of Europe, where monarchies and kingly crowns exist, these missions are settled in the audience of the Prime Minister, who, under those Governments, represents the Government and the power of the nation; but we have no such government here. A man to reach this Government must appeal to the representatives of the people; and it is for this that Louis Kossuth seeks to address himself to you, and if possible, to persuade you, by every means and argument, to his convictions. Is there anything wrong in this? Is there anything indelicate in it? Is there anything in it to startle gentlemen in the fear that they may subject themselves to the charge that they were learning the doctrines of American republicanism at the hands of a foreigner? I repeat it, that he would be false to his mission if he did not seek to have an audience before you-you the representatives of this mighty Republic-and if possible, to convince you of the righteousness of his cause; to enlist your sympathy and aid in his behalf. This is his object, and for it he desires to make his appeal. Are we afraid

that he will convince us? Are we afraid that if we are convinced in the cause of human free

dom, and in relation to the great rights of nations, that if we acknowledge the fact that the confession will involve some cost? And shall we shrink under such an apprehension? Such is not the temper of the American people. No one believes more sincerely and cordially than I do in the profound wisdom of the doctrines laid down by the early founders of our Government. Interference with foreign nations in our infant condition would have been unwise, so the men who formed that Government understood it, and hence the Father of his Country distinctly recommended us to avoid them. The recommendation at the time was wise, but the principle was but the principle of policy. It was, as I have said, wise, just, sound, and becoming in a nation of some three millions of inhabitants; but, sir, it would not be wise in a nation of twentyfive millions of people, with a commerce spreading itself throughout the globe, with powers hardly yet developed, but developing themselves with a rapidity which amazes and startles both. Sir, never in my life did I feel prouder of myself as an American citizen than when I read the letter of the present distinguished Secretary of State to the Austrian. It has been my lot, it may have been my misfortune, to have differed with that gentleman all my life in reference to other questions, yet I confess that my blood in my veins tingled to my finger ends under the glow of patriotic admiration as I read that specimen of noble American pride that expression of a just consciousness of American power, as well as of American right. The records of your negotiations heretofore are marked by a creeping caution, a fear of giving offence, and a shrinking, no evidence of which you find in the letter to which I now refer, and which spoke out as became not only a Republic, but as became a nation of twenty-five millions of freemen, freemen proud of their character, and, if it please you, sir, proud, in a righteous cause, of their power, too. Mr. WILLIAMS. With the permission of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. DISNEY,] I desire to ask him a question. The distinguished gentleman from Virginia [Mr. BAYLY] announced to the House yesterday, seemingly with great pleasure, that there were not twenty members in this Congress that indorsed the doctrines of Louis Kossath. I thought then that he was mistaken, and I desire now to ask the gentleman from Ohio whether we are to understand him as indorsing the doctrines of Louis Kossuth?

Mr. DISNEY. If the gentleman will honor me by listening to my remarks, he will understand precisely where I stand.

Europe, it is all idle for you to shrink back and
say, that because your immediate, peculiar, and
personal interests are not directly and immediately
concerned, that you will not interfere. Such is
not the law of nature; it is not the law of God; it
is not the law which God himself has stamped
upon humanity.

Mr. CAMPBELL, (resuming.) No better argument can be presented by any living man, upon the proposition just made by my colleague, [Mr. DISNEY,] than the one which has been read at the desk. I do not propose now to add to it a single word. But I do desire to understand from my colleague fully and unequivocally the extent to which he proposes to go. I desire to know from him whether it is his design to advocate the doctrine of intervention, as it has been proposed by Louis Kossuth in the various speeches that he has made? I desire to know from him whether he intends to advocate the position that this Government shall declare to Russia, in the event of a struggle between Hungary and Austria, that she shall not interpose; and whether he would be prepared to back that declaration by war?

Mr. CARTTER (rising to a question of order) inquired whether the half hour allowed by the resolution closing debate had not expired? The CHAIRMAN stated that it had just ex

In our daily pursuits, how often does the senti-
ment to which I have adverted rise up in the
bosom of every man, and tempt him to step
aside and do that which the instinct of which I
speak tells him is right? This country cannot
wrap herself up in any such miserable, selfish pol-
icy as would refuse every generous appeal. This
country has a mission to fulfill. It is a high and
noble one; and though some of us may seek to
postpone the hour, yet it is rolling on-destiny
impels us onward, and the time must come, and
will come, when our institutions will come in con-
flict with those of the despotic Governments of
Europe. The battle must be fought. It would
require no very great ingenuity to show by argu-pired.
ment that it even may be sound policy, even in an
interested and selfish point of view, to interfere
when any great infraction of the laws of nations
shall have been perpetrated by any of the great
monarchical Governments. The laws of nations
are but the laws of right, as established by com-
mon sense and sanctioned by human reason; and
when these laws are violated and trampled down
by the strong arm of power, it is the duty alike
of nations and of individuals to protest against
the outrage.

It is not necessary that I should refer here to par-
ticular cases.
I have not the time. But it is both
the right and duty of the Government to lay down
her broad and general principles of right, and to
protest against the wrong; and if the protest shall
be disregarded, it will be time sufficient for the
country to determine upon its course when that
hour arrives and the case presents itself. But, in
my humble judgment, looking to the power and the
future destiny of this country, it is its bounden
duty, in the position which it occupies on the
theatre of the world, to protest at any and every
and at all times against any and every of those
terrible infractions of the laws of nations that
may be and sometimes are perpetrated by the
hands of power; and I would protest against
them, no matter how great or formidable may be
the guilty power. It does not follow as a matter
of course, that because you protest against infrac-
tions of the sort, you are therefore bound to inter-
vene with armed force upon all occasons. No,
sir; you place yourself right before the world by
the protest. You give the moral power of your
position to the doctrines which you announce; and
if the particular case does indeed require it, why
then you can intervene-aye, if necessity or honor
calls, intervene by force of arms. Having ex-
hausted the time allotted to me, and thus hurried-
rapidly, and imperfectly expressed my views,
I take my seat.

1 desire, then, to say briefly and rapidly-for I will trespass but little longer upon the committeethat, in my opinion, the day has gone by when this Country may wrap itself up in its own selfishness and have nothing to do with the affairs of other nations. I regretted to hear, on yesterday, thely, sentiment advanced by the gentleman from North Carolina, [Mr. VENABLE,] that the nations of the earth that had no liberty, deserved to have none. God cannot love the wretch he starves.

Mr. VENABLE. The gentleman misunderstood me: I said that they were not ready for liberty.

Mr. DISNEY. My time is nearly out; I must hasten. Sir, we are a living antagonism to the despotic Governments of Europe, and they never can have peace and quiet there so long as this country exists with the prosperity and happiness with which it now exists. There is not a steampacket which floats upon the waves of the broad Atlantic, as it bears the letters from emigrants in this country to their friends on the European continent, but carries the seeds of liberty to that continent. There is not a gale which wafts your commerce across the ocean-there is hardly a billow which breaks upon its broad bed which does not bear upon its bosom the seeds of republicanism as they are borne upon their way to Europe's despotic shores. The very pictures of happiness and prosperity existing in this country, as the emigrants here describe them, must favorably impress their friends in Europe as to the effect of republican institutions. These letters are read throughout the neighborhoods to which they are dispatched, and thus we are hourly furnishing aconstant and steady supply of republican thoughts to the people of Europe. And, sir, when our institutions are having this constant effect upon

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Ohio. I have not time
now to reply to the remarks of my colleague,
[Mr. DISNEY;] I will, however, send to the Clerk's
desk an extract, which I wish to have read to the
committee, from one who, though dead, yet liveth,
I trust, in the hearts of his countrymen; it is from
the Farewell Address of Washington.

The Clerk then read the following extract:
"The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign

nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have

with them as little political connection as possible. So far
as we have already formed engagements, let them be ful-
filled with perfect good faith. Here let it stop.

"Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have
none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be en-

gaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are

essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it

must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial

ties, in the ordinary vicissitude of her politics, or the ordi-
nary combinations and collisions of her friendships or en-
mities.

"Our detached and distant situation invites and enables
us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people,
under an efficient government, the period is not far off when
we may defy material injury from external annoyance;
when we may take such an attitude, as will cause the neu-
trality we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously
respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossi-
bility of making acquisitions upon us, will not hazard the

giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war,

as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

"Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?"

The resolution and the pending amendment were then reported, as follows, viz:

Resolved, That a committtee of five be appointed by the Speaker to wait upon Louis Kossuth and introduce him to the House of Representatives.

Mr. VENABLE had moved to strike out all after the word "resolved," and to insert,

"That the Speaker be authorized to invite Louis Kossuth to a privileged seat within the House."

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks it proper, under the curious circumstances under which the committee is now acting, to state, that in the opinion of the Chair the resolution which was adopted in the House this morning terminating debate upon "so much of the President's message as relates to Louis Kossuth," does not apply to the resolution now under consideration. The Chair is of that opinion, because this resolution does not connect itself with the message by any language which is contained in it.

Mr. CLINGMAN. I appeal from that decision.

Several VOICES. "You cannot get the floor."
Mr. CLINGMAN. I have a right to appeal.
Loud cries of "Order!" "Order!"

Mr. CAMPBELL, of Ohio. I have not yielded the floor, nor do I design to do so unless I am decided to be out of order.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair made the point of order himself, and stated it to the House, and he thinks that gentlemen have a right to appeal. The question now is, "Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the committee?" If the decision of the Chair shall be overruled, it will be regarded by the Chair as a decision that this resolution of the gentleman from Ohio, with the pending amendment of the gentleman from North Carolina, is before the committee, and that the resolution adopted by the House terminating debate upon so much of the President's message as relates to Louis Kossuth, should be applied to that resolution.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Tennessee. Is the appeal debatable?

The CHAIRMAN. As the question of order on which the appeal is taken grew out of a resolution to close debate, the appeal, in the opinion of the Chair, is not debatable.

Mr. ORR demanded tellers on the appeal; which were ordered, and Messrs. VENABLE and WILLIAMS appointed.

The question was then taken on the appeal, and the tellers reported-ayes 8, noes 99-no quorum voting.

Loud cries of "Call the roll!" "Call the roll!" The roll was then called, and the absentees noted. The committee rose, and the Speaker having resumed the chair, the chairman of the committee [Mr. JONES] reported that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union had had the Union generally under consideration, and, having found itself without a quorum, ordered the roll to be called, and instructed him to report this fact to the House, with the names of the absent

For myself, I desire to say, that while I am as ready as any gentleman upon this floor to extend to Kossuth a personal compliment, I am equally ready to resist to the last extremity upon this floor, any attempt to commit this Government to the desertion of that principle of non-intervention which we have cherished from the earliest infancy of our Government up to this hour. And if gentlemen intend no more than a personal compliment, why should they object to the adoption of this amendment, which tells him plainly and frankly, that that is what we intend-that it is all we intend? Mr. SEYMOUR, of New York. Mr. Chair- His frankness with us demands at least this much at our hands.

breathes a spirit of pure devotion to the great
principles of this nation, and pure devotion to the
great American character, and an acknowledg-
ment of gratitude in the receipt of American no-
tice. That is the inference which I draw from all
he has said; and I proposed the resolution in the
first place, and I support it now, because I regard
it as involving considerations only personal to
Kossuth, although I protest that the resolution
was not offered with a view of settling the prin-
ciple of intervention or non-intervention. Yet
it does incorporate the sentiment of the American
heart, that it sympathizes always and everywhere
with the sentiment of liberty; and that it sympa-
thizes always with every person who may be in-
volved in the misfortunes of oppression. Now,
that is the real soul of the resolution; and I hope |
the friends of it, whatever may be their feelings
in relation to intervention or non-intervention,
will suffer this simple tribute, thus unincumbered,
to go forth from this Hall without attempting to
ingraft upon it the principle of non-intervention.
I shall vote against the amendment.

[Here the hammer fell.]

The question now being on the amendment of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. HARRIS] to the amendment of his colleague [Mr. CHURCHWELL,] tellers were demanded and ordered, and Messrs. CLINGMAN and HALL were appointed.

The question was then taken, and the tellers reported-ayes 82, noes 53.

So the amendment was adopted.

The question then was on the adoption of the amendment as amended.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia, called for tellers; which were ordered, and Messrs. PENN and HUNTER appointed.

The question being then taken, there were-ayes 71, noes 77.

to.

So the amendment as amended was not agreed

Mr. COBB moved to amend the original resolution by inserting after the word "Kossuth," the words" and his associates in exile."

in the beginning of this discussion that I should
trespass for a single moment upon the attention of
the committee. I had intended to content myself
with my vote, to explain to my constituents and
the country my views in relation to this matter.
I will say, however, by the courtesy of the com-
mittee, that every single syllable that I have heard
urged against the adoption of the original resolu-
tion has only tended to confirm me in the belief
that it is right and just and proper that we should
adopt it in the form in which it was first presented
to us. What has been said in opposition to it?
Every word which has been said in opposition to
it has been based upon an assumption which does
not apply to the resolution. Has anybody here
proposed intervention? No, sir; and it would be
just as proper to charge those who oppose this
resolution with being the apologists of the Empe- ||
ror of Russia-aye, sir, with being the apologists
of the bloody butcher Haynau, as it is to charge
the friends of this resolution with desiring to plunge ||
the country into a war of intervention.

nessed that disgraceful scene, that miserable apology for a public reception, and who has seen the conduct of a portion of this House, must be perfectly satisfied that there is reason for proposing

this amendment.

We have witnessed here a deliberate attempt, which has been for two days systematically persisted in by a factious minority, to defeat the will of a majority of this House; and I for one, want that the whole action of this body should go forth before the people of this country, that they may || understand who it is that thus endeavors to thwart their will, and from what quarter this movement proceeds. There is another thing which makes it proper that this amendment should be offeredand that is the hypocritical conduct of the present National Administration toward Louis Kossuth. The President, after having, by direction of Congress, sent a national ship to bring him to our shores; after naming him in his annual message, and directing the attention of Congress to his expected arrival-calling him in that message, GovAgain, let me ask who will be offended at the ernor Kossuth; after having sent a special mesadoption of this resolution? Will it offend any-senger to New York, with the resolution so unanbody whose good opinion we now have? No, sir. imously passed by this Congress, welcoming him It may offend the iron-hearted despots of Europe; as the nation's guest, and thus impliedly inviting but do they love us now? Did they ever love us? him here, we now find that the organ and the They would have strangled us in our infancy if friends of the Administration are secretly stabbing they could. They would do it now if it was in him to the heart, and attempting, by every means their power. in their power, to give him a cool reception-and they have thus far succeeded. But the people of this country, when they come to understand it, will indignantly frown upon this conduct, and will by their action reverse the decision which has led to this reception. For these reasons, sir, I want a committee appointed by the friends of Kossuth, or the majority of this House-not a committee who will go to him and say, "We come to perform an unwilling duty "but a committee who, with warm hearts, will rejoice to welcome and introduce the representative of free principles in Europe to the representatives of the only free Government in the world. Let, then, the friends of Hungary, the friends of universal freedom, the opponents of Russian interference and of Haynau, be appointed on this committee instead of the friends or apologists of either.

Now, I desire to make a kind of home application of this matter. I have the honor to represent that gallant and magnanimous constituency, the first Congressional district of the glorious State of Mississippi, and I undertake to say that there is not a man or a woman in that district who would not welcome Kossuth to their roofs and their firesides. And what would they say to him? Would they say to him, "Mr. Kossuth, we are sorry that Haynau did not butcher you and your wife"? Would they tell him that it would have been well for the world if Haynau had butchered him and his wife and children? Would they talk in that way? No, sir; not in my country. [Laughter.] Mr. C. said: I desire it to be distinctly under- They would tell him that they regretted the fatal stood that I intend to vote for the original resolu- calamity that overtook the Hungarian cause. But tion; but at the same time my sympathies are not would they put on their knapsacks the next mornconfined to the distinguished chieftain. Whilst ing and go to Hungary to fight for her? I think I have said I should vote for the original resowe remember the epaulettes, let us not forget the not. And yet gentlemen tell us that if, after adopt-lution. I shall do so, because I consider myself knapsack. Whilst I admire Louis Kossuth as ing a resolution of welcome to Kossuth, we now much as any man upon this floor, my sympathies raise a committee to carry out that resolution, the do not stop there. I admire also those of his gal-construction will be put on it that we are prepared lant associates who are now in this city with him; and I contend that it would be a personal indignity to those brave men to confine our invitation to the distinguished individual whose name now stands alone in the resolution. If you will revert to the language of the resolution adopted by the last Congress, you will see that Kossuth and his associates in exile were invited to come to our shores. They are here to-day; and shall we make a distinction between them? I offer this resolution in good faith. I hope it will be adopted. I trust that when Kossuth is admitted to this Hall, his companions in exile will be admitted likewise. Whatever inference might be drawn from my votes upon this resolution since its introduction, I have stated in private conversation long since, that although I was willing that Kossuth should be admitted to a seat upon this floor, I yet repudiated his doctrine. I repudiate it to-day. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GENTRY] asked "Who is afraid of Kossuth's speeches?" I answer, Not I. I am not afraid of Kossuth's eloquence or power. He may go into my own district and promulgate his doctrine there. If my people choose to indorse it, let them do it; but, for one, I will not.

I have voted throughout for the resolution to introduce Kossuth into this Hall. I want his doctrine to be promulgated here in the very midst of the Representatives of the American people. Let them hear it from his own lips. I understood it when he landed at New York; but when I told Kossuth's friends that he entertained such opinions, they denied it. I was in hopes that Kossuth would be allowed to speak here, and that our Speaker, in receiving him, would have so addressed him as to have required him to be explicit in his answer. Thus his doctrine would have been disseminated through the land without the possibility of its being misrepresented.

to take up our arms and go to war for the Hunga-
rian cause. I repeat again that every syllable I
have heard urged against this resolution is based
upon a false assumption. In other words, you
build up a man of straw and then knock him
down. [Here the hammer fell.]

[Cries of "Go on!" "Go on!"]
The question was then taken on Mr. COBB's
amendment, and it was not agreed to.

Mr. DEAN moved to amend the resolution by
striking out the words "the Speaker," and insert-
ing in lieu thereof "this House," so as to make
it read,

Resolved, That a committee of five be appointed by this House to wait upon Louis Kossuth and introduce him to the House of Representatives.

Mr. BAYLY, of Virginia. I rise to a question of order. The point I make is, that this being the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, we have no right to change the power which appoints the committees of the House.

The CHAIRMAN. This committee can do nothing final. Whatever is done here must go to the House, and one of the standing rules of the House is, that all committees shall be appointed by the Speaker, unless otherwise ordered by the House. The Chair therefore thinks the amendment in order.

Mr. DEAN. I am entirely satisfied with and shall vote for the original resolution, and should not have offered this amendment were it not perfectly evident, from what we have seen in this city and the action of this House, that there is an organized opposition, who are determined not only to defeat this resolution, but, if possible, to offer insult and indignity to the illustrious guest of the nation. Any man who witnessed the arrival of Louis Kossuth yesterday, and saw him received in the capital of the country by a crowd of boys and three shabby carriages, with a single pair of crow-be-spoken horses harnessed to each of them-Mr. NABERS. I had not the most distant idea (much laughter)—I say, that any one who wit

[Here the hammer fell.]

so instructed by the almost unanimous voice of the citizens of my State. The people of the Empire City-the commercial emporium of the whole Union-have, by their enthusiastic reception of Governor Kossuth, and the people of the capital of that State have, at a public meeting, instructed me to vote for such a resolution. But I needed no such instruction. I should do it cheerfully, from the dictates of my own heart. No man needs an apology for voting for such a proposition, sustained as it is by the voice of the whole country; for I had rather trust the generous sympathies-the spontaneous sentiment of a free people-than the cool calculations of the shrewdest politician.

[In the middle of this sentence, the Chairman's hammer fell.]

Mr. WILLIAMS. I desired very much, on yesterday, that I should have had an opportunity to place my views and opinions with regard to this whole Kossuth matter fairly before the country. I have only five minutes now, but I feel disposed to express those opinions in an unbridled manner. The pretence the hollow pretence that that resolution is merely designed for the purpose of doing honor to Kossuth, has been stripped of its plausi bility, and the proposition now stands nakedly before the gaze of the American people. My colleague and friend from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS] offered a proposition here in the language of George Washington, that we are prepared to enter into " 'friendly relations with all, entangling alliances with none." That was a plain and simple proposition, that could not have offended Louis Kossuth or anybody else, but it was voted down by this committee.

Sir, the assertion that Louis Kossuth was invited here as the guest of the nation by the last Congress, is not warranted by the records of the country. We found him an exile from Hungary, having voluntarily abandoned his high position as Governor of Hungary, and wended his way to a Turkish prison, and we offered him an asylum here. He lands upon our shores, and declares that he scorns your sympathy unless you follow