A recess of half an hour was then taken, and some little caucusing followed. At the sound of the gavel the meeting reassembled, and the committee reported in favor of Messrs. George Ferguson of Kentucky, Lucien Herrman of Louisiana, and W. Messick of Colorado as candidates. The report was accepted.
“MR. ROGERS of Missouri: ‘Mr. President, — The report being properly before the House now, I move to amend it by substituting for the name of Mr. Herrman that of Mr. Lucius Harris of St. Louis, who is well and honorably known to us all. I do not wish to be understood as casting the least reflection upon the high character and standing of the gentleman from Louisiana—far from it. I respect and esteem him as much as any gentleman here present possibly can; but none of us can be blind to the fact that he has lost more flesh during the week that we have lain here than any among us—none of us can be blind to the fact that the committee has been derelict in its duty, either through negligence or a graver fault, in thus offering for our suffrages a gentleman who, however pure his own motives may be, has really less nutriment in him—’
Which Statement is best supported by the details in the passage?
(3 points)
Responses
The passengers are horrified at the idea of cannibalism.
The passengers are horrified at the idea of cannibalism.
Mr. Rogers speaks to express his dissatisfaction with being chosen by the committee
Mr. Rogers speaks to express his dissatisfaction with being chosen by the committee
Mr. Rogers wants another candidate because Mr. Herrman is too thin.
1 answer
The statement that is best supported by the details in the passage is:
Mr. Rogers wants another candidate because Mr. Herrman is too thin.
This is evident from Mr. Rogers' remarks regarding Mr. Herrman's physical condition and his suggestion to substitute Mr. Herrman with Mr. Lucius Harris.
1 answer
1 answer
1 answer
1 answer