9 ous, no doubt, and quick in resentment, but he did not intend what has been assigned to him. After all that has been said and done, on a post bellum examination, what is it? A fight in the Senate Chamber, resulting in two flesh wounds, which ought not to have detained him from the Senate. Being rather a handsome man, perhaps he would not like to expose himself by making his appearance for some time: but if he had been in the Army, there was no reason why he should not go to the 6§ld the next day; and he would deserve to be cashiered if he did not go; What does his physician say ? He says that there were but two flesh wounds; that he never had a fever while under his care and attendance, and that he was ready to come into the Senate the next day, but for his advice; and his advice was, that he should not come into thsjSenate, because it would aggravate the excitement already too-high. He did not recommend him not to go into the committee room to be examined on the ground that his wounds had enfeebled him, but for other considerations, because it might aggravate the excitement already prevailing to an extent which might kad to mischievous consequences. This, then, is the mode of redress, to which Mr. Brooks resorted. I do not say what I should have advised him to do, but perhaps it was fortunate that I was absent in one respect, for I certainly should not have submitted to that insult. Possibly it might not have been offered if I were present, though I do not know the fact, because I cannot say exactly what would be the course of one of those persons who have a way of fabricating speeches. Perhaps, being in his speech, he would have had to read it; but I think it possible that on the appeal which I would have made on my discretion, his friends might have induced him to reform it in some way so as to conform at least to the requirements of common decency in public opinion. If he had not done so, I do not know what would have been my course. For this transaction, as I have detailed it, and without the intelligence which I have detailed being before them, the Legislature of Massachusetts have sent their resolutions here. These resolutions are without a precedent in the his'tory of this country. I hope other Senators will speak to them, for they are not only an insult to South Carolina and her representatives in Congress, but I think they assail the Constitution of the country. Before commenting on them, I may be permitted to allude to the first precedent of a congressional fight, which was between two members from New England. This affair is said to be an evidence of southern 'violence and southern ruffianism. Some papers speak of the bowie-knife and the revolver of southern blackguards. Why, sir, the first fight which took place in Congress was between Matthew Lyon and Roger Griswold, from Connecticut. Our ancestors in those days looked upon a fight with very little of the importance which is now attached to it. They said it was so unimportant, that they were vexed that so much of the time of the House was occupied in considering it. It seems that Matthew Lyon, originally an officer in the Army, had been cashiered and awarded a wooden sword. He then lived in Con- necti^t. At that time, and at this, too, in Connecticut, there was a pretty pressing opinion against a low man, and he could'not stand it. He had to move over into Vermont, a new State, then the frontier of the country. He was elected a member of Congress from Vermont. He was one of the Democrats. I suppose he was one of the Red Republicans of that day against John Adams’s administration. Was he a Democrat ? •Mr. FOOT. Yes, sir; he was a Democrat. Mr. BUTLER. It was before the gentleman from Vermont taught school there, and Lyon assumed to be a kind of apostle of liberty and Democracy. Not satisfied with instructing the people of Vermont, he went to Mr. Griswold of Connecticut; stood behind his seat and told him, “ Sir, you do not represent Connecticut correctly; I know these people; they are mean people; they will take $1,000 as soon as $9,000 for a salary.’’ Griswold stood it for a great while. Finally Lyon said, “ I will go over to Connecticut; I will talk to these people, and I will have an influence upon them; I will show whether you ought to occupy your seat or not.” Griswold said, ‘' I hope you will not go with your wooden sword.” He repeated this twice; and after somebody suggested to Lyon that the third time was too much, he spit in Griswold’s face. A great hubbub was raised, and Lyon was brought up, I suppose, to his perfect delight, to be tried as tn । whether he should be expelled from the House, of Representatives or not. On the following day, Griswold involved himself in a difficulty without any consideration. He took a good hickory stick and went to Lyon. He did not give him any notice at all. They fought with hickory । sticks, and spit-boxes, and tongs, all over tht House of Representatives, while the House was in session. Our hardy ancestors at that time did 1 not think a fight of so much importance that (hey should take it into serious consideration. They said, let them both go. They refused to expel either of them. When Mr. Randolph struck Mr. Allstine, the matter was brought before the House; but none of these things were considered of a sufficient magnitude to invoke the high function of a Legislature sending its missive to Congress to tell them what to do. Massachusetts is the first to set the example. She has not only administered- a reprimand to Mr. Brooks without any evidence; she has not only assumed to pronounce judgment before hearing the evidence, like a judge passing sentence on a criminal before hearing his defense; | but she has undertaken indiscriminately to say, that she demands of the Congress.of the United ' States to carry out her behests in regard to what she considers to be an outrage upon the privileges of the Senate. I Can anything be more insulting to the Congress of the United States than the spectacle of | a State sending down a message to its. “faithful i Commons”—-a message that they are to pronounce this or that judgment? Are we to submit to this? I did not wish to make the contest; but^» in my opinion,- these resolutions, in. the terms they import, ought not to-have been received by the Senate. Taking all1 these thibgs into consideration, indicted as Mr. Brooks has been by an ex ptrlt accusation, without evidence, without even the b finding of a grand jury, what is his position ? If
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=