Democratic Sentinel, Volume 2, Number 4, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 March 1878 — CONGRESSIONAL BROILS. [ARTICLE]

CONGRESSIONAL BROILS.

Some Old-Time Personal ISonbonterß in the House of BepreSeHterives. After the attack upon Mr. Sumner by Brooks, writes a Washington correspondent in the Chicago Times, a Massachuygtts member named, Cornyns made a severe speech directed against Brooks and the State z of South Carolina. He was thoroughly armed with revolvers and bowie-knives, and made a great sensation. To his offensive utterances Brooks quietly replied that in his country a cock which wore spurs and wouldn’t fight was laughed at even by the hens. This was intended to provoke the Massachusetts walking arsenal to a challenge, but he was silent. Then Burlingame sprung to his feet and said there were “sonsof Massachusetts who were hot afraid to maintain her honor and defend her righte on any field.” This was considered the proper thing to do under the circumstances. Brooks sent a challenge, and the whole world knows the rest. Burlingame ehose heavy rifles, and selected Canada as the dueling ground. Brooks declined the meeting on the ground that he could not with safety to himself traverse an enemy’s country, and so the affair ended. During the exciting times of the Kan-sas-Nebraska troubles Lovejoy was making one of his fierce speeches against the pro-slavery men. With sleeves rolled up and eyes aflame with excitement he came down the aisle, but was met on the boundary line between the Republican and Democratic domains by Prior, of Virginia, who struck an attitude, and, in deep, 'tragic tones, exclaimed, “Thus far ehalt thou go, but no farther.” Potter, of Wisconsin, a stalwart frontiersman, had followed Lovejoy down the aide ready to take up his cause in the event of a fracas, and at once took Pryor’s threat as personal to himself. A few angry words followed. Potter received a formal challenge, accepted promptly, and chose bowie-knives and the Seventh-streetside of the Patent Office as the place of meeting. This barbarous encounter was prevented by the police and the intervention of friends. Of course, in times of very strong political excitement, it requires but a spark to fire the magazine of bad feeling. But some of the fights of those times had the most absurd origin. While Lola Montez was in this country she won the heart and commanded the purse of a member from Tennessee, named Polk. His devotion to the fair frail one was so marked that it becime the theme of common talk among Congressmen, from whom ordinary peccadilloes of the sort scarcely elicited any censure. A Mr. Stanley, from North Carolina, made the loves of Mr. Polk the subject of pleasantry in one of his public speeches, which aroused the gentleman from Tennessee. A challenge was the result, but, after much talk and a great deal of ill suppressed excitement, the principals to the affair decided not to kill each other.

The same Mr. Stanley figured in another affair of honor whose origin was quite as unconsequential as the Lola Montez quarrel. In the discussion of the annua. River and Harbor bill, a Mr. Inge, of Alabama, a Democrat, ordinarily opposed to appropriations for purposes of internal improvements, made a strong appeal for aid to improve the harbor of Mobile. This was too much for Stanley, who, as a Whig, had often been made to suffer by the economic objections f Inge. He charged the Alabama member with inconsistency and indecency, and the words “ liar and coward ” soon passed between them. They agreed that nothing but blood could heal the wounded honor on both sides, and a meeting was arranged to come off at Silver Springs, a few miles out of town on the Maryland side. The weapons were pistols, and two shots were actually fired when Frank Blair arrived on the scene, and oy threatening and coaxing persuaded the combatants to desist until after they had partaken of a breakfast, which he at once ordered. A generous breakfast, seconded by the good endeavors of their host, restored harmony, and after a cordial handshaking they returned to their arduous legislative duties.

These instances of what was of almost daily occurrence twenty years ago in both houses of Congress may Seem but the idle vaporings of vainglorious Falstaffa. There is no doubt that the men of that time were ever ready to fight. It was not always that the qUaurels among Congressmen ended in the dignified appeal to the code of honor. A duel in those days was considered a highly honorable thing, but especially for the settlement of difficulties between gentlemen. A common hand-to-hand en counter was esteemed disgraceful, even among those quarrelsome, law-breaking law-makers. One of these disgraceful fights took place between a couple of Mississippi members. The quarrel was one of trifling local importance, but the lie passed, when one of them, a Mr. Wilcox, approached his antagonist, whose name was Brown, and asked if he intended that remark for him (Wilcox). Bfown replied that he did, when Wilcox struck out from the shoulder. The parties clonched, and in the struggle overturned a chair, and finally fell to the floor, Wilcox on top. The latter then reached for his knife, but at this juncture Dr. Fitch, of Indiana, a giant in physical prowess, took Wilcox by the collar, and, jerking him to his feet, brandished an immense gold-headed cane over his head, with this timely bit of advice : “You put up your knife, or I will beat out your brains with this cane.” Then Col. Savage, a member from Tennessee, gravely rose and announced that the difficulty between his friends had been amicably arranged, whereat the whole House joined in a boisterous laugh. On another occasion, Churchill and Cullom, two Tennessee members, had a difficulty, when the former gave the latter the lie. Cullom, with true Southern spirit, leaped over two desks and was coming at Churchill like a mad bull, when the latter opened the drawer of his desk and took ®ut a revolver. The weapon fell from his hand to the floor, and a member in the interests of peace clapped his foot upon it and held it there. Mr. Brcoks, of South Carolina, then rose to a question of privilege, namely, that, for the convenience of members, the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to have constructed a rack to be placed in the cloak room upon which gentlemen could deposit their weapons. Jokes were dangerous things in those days. Mr. Polk, of Tennessee, had a disagreeable habit of popping up on all occasions, a disposition not uncommon among the members of the present Congress. His colleague, Mr. Cullom, became incensed at’what Proctor Knott would call the “ too previous ” conduct of his friend, and suggested to the latter that a large piece of wax affixed to the broadest part of his person might enable him to keep still. This pleasantry touched the pride of Polk, who thirsted for blood. As Mr. Oullom was the father of a family, his friends decided that he should not fight, and a young member from Kentucky took up the quarrel, and a fight was arranged for, but never came off. During the long con - test fee the Speakership, in which Mr. Banks triumphed, lists of questions were submitted to the different candidates to be answered. These questions involved the leading issues of the day. Mr. Barksdale, of Mississippi* had prepared a list of these questions, when Mr. Kennett, of Missouri, a Whig, submitted a series, beginning with “Do you believe in a future State, and if so, will it be a free or a slave state?” The intention on the part of Kennett was one of mere pleasantry, but the irascible Barksdale took it as an affront and

angrily inquired whether the gentleman intended any reflection, and if so he hurled it back with acorn. Kennett pleaded his innocence and the affair was accommodated without blood.