OCR Text |
Show THE CANNON CAMPBELL CONTEST. For some reason the telegraph dispatches from Washington have had very little to say of the progress of the Cannon-Campbell controversy. We have, however, received a copy of the Congressional Record of Wednesday, Dec. [December] 7th, which contains the particulars of a debate upon the subject held the day previous, from which we learn that the Speaker of the House ruled that there was no law authorizing the making up of a roll of delegates from the territories, until ?[these] delegates had been sworn in; hence that it availed Mr. [Mister] Cannon nothing that his name had been placed upon the rod by the clerk of the house. The law expressly provides that the clerk shall make up a ?[unreadable] the members of the House before Congress meets, and some of the ablest members of the House took part in the debate and held that the law also applied to delegates. The result of the Speaker's ruling is that neither Mr. Cannon nor Campbell will be sworn in until the case is brought before the House, and has received its decision. From the ?[silence] of the dispatches we surmise that the case has been delayed, and that it has not yet been brought up for decision in the House. The debate of the ?[0th] inst. [instance] however, showed that Mr. Cannon has many friends in the House, and some of them are prominent members of that body. Hon. [Honorable] S.S. Cox of New York, and Hon. Samuel Randall Pa.[Pennsylvania] speaker of the last house, interested themselves warmly in Mr. Cannon's behalf. The house ordered a number of documents relating to ? ?[acre] to be printed in the Record, the copy of which received by us contains Campbells written argument in favor of the ?ing to him of the certificate of election, and Mr. Cannon's reply thereto, the latter a very able and convincing paper. It also contains a number of other documents bearing on the case, and it cannot ?? result beneficially to Mr. Cannon to have these documents published in the Record. |