Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-02-05

cd lay The addition at provisions Tor au
thor,sing the making a canal from the Pc
tomac TO the Eastern Brancr which pro
vision was certainly MOI analogous In lie
main object of The bill MIR. NJ SAID he
questioned whe'hera bill " Z passed with
grea, many sections. but those who voted
for II obIected 10 som. of them
He conn hinseli recullcci amen tiinrnts
10 bills having BEEN made, which were
so obnoxious, that gentlemen friendly
In ~. object OF the bills had been al
most ready Ia give mp the main point,
rather than sgree TO The amendments.
The gentlemen from Rhode Island had
taken d distinction between the cases AZ
Nj" ne and Missouri which he appeared
10 think WAS Hutavorable 10 the claims OF
ihr laIier TO admission into the Union
Now. MIR. NJ. said, lie Thought, on the
contrary, that Missouri had The strongest
cla'ai. Malnr, said he, Is in the actual
exercise of III" privilrg = of self govern.
men'. Is Missouri, IL Maine, NAV
eni JOYS thu same civil rights and benefits
AZ the citizens of any other state he Is
not hali-ci'izen, half subject, a terri
fOriai 'Han--he IL full grown citizen.
The Repre- seniaiives ofthe state Of Ma.
sachus"tts, Gncluding Min } lu the Sc
nate and House q Representatives. enjoy
all The rights b longing To their stations I;
an' when the Yeas and Nays are called,
IN answer Ave or NO.-liow is il with
The Delegate from Missouri? He is miss
ei on the rO!l-you skip over him he
may speak, but cannot give vote on a
Que siiOn.
Reference had been made to the pro
ceedings on tins subject on, of doors.
Those proceedings, said Mr.. NJ. have
N ma lsi (f,,r .t..H
petition much; we plume ourselves OH not
p STEERING the General Government with
Our pra! r.. Nor do We sci the woods on
me, To DIVE the game out. When the
question, every one had alluded TO, came
properly before the House, MIR. Nj. said
he would speak his sentiments upon IL.
Geni'. msn were enqulring what, 10
faction, was The population OF Missouri
For his part. il she was otherwise fitted for
&c government, aud had a population OF
hui twenty thousand, he would say to her,
C0hie INTO the Family, and become one
OF us. In ao instance, he said, had Con-
g'ess assisted, IN the admission of new
a'es, OH d populatiop of sixty thousand.
Jie true reason OF The objection TO the.
prompt admission of Missouri was, the
principle 10 Which gentlemen had alluded
and which had made so much noise out of
ton, he had felt more anxiety than on any
other question lately presented 10 his
view. /, mas, said he, be matter Of
philosophy and abstraction with the gen
tienien OF the east bui IL is a different
Thing with MS. Iiey may phiiosOphIZe
ana town meeting about ii as much as
III : ple asc Int, with great submission.
SIR, they know nothing about the cues
ton.
The proposition now before the Senate
was, 10 rrcommit-iOr what Mhv, Tor
what the Senate couli do as we'll as a
committee. Jadging from the arguments,
81 appeared 10 him HAT one side vas BET
lei prepared than the other for the dis
cnssioD. IL the Senate was ready tor the
discussion, II maitercd little what The
precise form OF the question was. There
was no improperly, he conceived, in the
proposed connection ofiiIe two subjects
OF Name and Missouri nor did IL appear
TO HIM OF any Importance ~hai the shape
OF The question WAS, ii il was substantial.
ly before the Senate. The question TO ID
gree or disagree Ia the report of the com
mIiiee, To X within its scope every other
question connected aiih The subject, and
uid adm. of the Is est !ehate. He IS as
therefore opposed To- the recsmmiiment.
Mr.. morrill,, OF New Hampshire, said
IT y AS not his intention 10 enter into
discussion OF The merits Of these two sub
je, ~, al this time ; he thodgilt il was IN
proper. am, said he, in favor of the
motion, because am unwilling TO consi-
der the subjects, and act upon them, in
this unnatural connection. q, ntlemen
say there Is such similarity, they NAV
b. considered with the greatest proprieiy
IN THIS near alliance. Sir, | think other
Aise. 10 me, there appears striking
incongruiiy. One object is, 10 admit
Maine into Tie uniou; lie other Is, 10 au-
fiorise the territory OF Missouri 10 form
d constitution, that she may bt admitted
al some future perIoh. Where then is the
IIk Grss Sir, this IL moi all. wish
each 10 stand npon its own basis TO
effect this, they must be considered
paratcly. One gentleman may have
doubts with respect TO the expedIrncy of
uniting Maine; another may have
complete conviction thai it wouii be ex-
iremeiy wrong tO.admii Missouri Without
RESTRICTIONS.
Nov, sir, you couple these together,
aud, om the fiHal question, sou compel
geHiir TO vote for both, or neither
And what is The result am fully salts
fed II is politically and morally right 10
admit Maine, aud wish 20 give ny ave
but am equally satisfied, II is politically !
aud morally wrong, 10 admit Missouri,
wIlhouI psOIibhIons. Diner gentleman |
believe, II Is politically and morally cor
rect TO admit both without restrictions.
Taen, SIR, you sc the dilemma, Ia which
some ar placed, by this strange councx.
ion. We are compelled 10 vote against |
Maine, which we tbink We ought not TO
do, or vote III favor 81 both, ana do that
WIN We cOnsciemtiousiy b. icve is po-
liicslly and morally wrong; While gen. |