Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1844-06-21

question.
Mr.. White hoped not tho memorial had ref
ercncc to tho prospective effect of adding now
territory to the Union-not to slavery as it now
exists III the United States.
Mr.. Berrlcn called for the yeas and nays
which wero ordered.
Mr.. White inquired how the question of reccp-
ton arose!
The Chair explained that according to the
usage of the Senate, tho question of reception
rose spontaneously with the presentation Of any
petition memorial, tho tendency of which re-
lated to tho question of slavery.
Mr.. BcrrICn said that, avcrsc he to the
introduction of any discussion whatever On the
subject in the national legislature, yet, believing
this paper within tho rulo Of tho Senate,
(Which, from its language, no could not at all
doubt,) he felt it to be his duty to resist its reccp
ton. 1t protested against tho continuance of sa-
very. 1t did not, it true, ask for tho abolition
of slavery but it protested against its continu-
ance and he could sec difference. in effect or
principle, between that and abolition. He should
now move to lay the question of reception on tho
table.
Mr.. White protested against this proposition !;
and on it. he raised the question of order. tho me-
memorial having been read, and thereby received.
He gave notice that if this motion, prevailed, he
would every day for tho remainder Of the ses-
sion, raise tho question Of reception, and debate
it throughout the morning hour.
Mr.. Phelps demanded tho yeas and nays on tho
motion to lay tho question of reception on the ia
bic, and they ordered.
Mr.. Crittenden to mako suggestlon-
He thought if his friend from Georgia dollberatcd
for moment on tho character of the memorial
and tho mcmorialists, he would see that he might
with great propricty. withdraw his objections
The mcmoralsts disclaim being operated upon
by. acting with, aboli:onsts. From the be-
ginning of this government TO tho present day. the
l.. L ! IN I
subject, and have annually put them forward as
their honest conviction. But, further than this
expression Of their opinions, they have not gone.
They have offered their advicc-nothng moro
In doing this, they acquit their consc iences and
they satisfied. They not like political
abolitonlsts-they stir up strife, for they
opposed to strife. Thoy oppose the annexation
of Texas because they opposed to the extern
sion of slavery. He did not think that in this
their memorial, camo within the rule or rsa 90 of
the Senate which requires the question Of recep-
ton to DO raised As to discussing the subject
he thought, considering tho manner in which it
had boon handled by Secretary of State, and
tho IN which II hnl n Irn"I,- le.-, .I~l~-.I ::
c~...>so, ION tho Texas treaty. it was not
worth while now to be fastidious about it. He
could assure his friend from Georgia he
moro abolitonist than he was but he could
not sec anything in this memorial to preclude its
reception.
Mr.. Barrow desired to hear the memorial and
letter again read.
They wcre read accordingly.
Mr.. Morchcad regretted exceedingly that n
question of this sort should arise in a body which
had been heretofore entirely free from excite
mont on this subject. He had risen merely to
say that, while he would vote with his friend
from Georgia in UNFOLDING tho rulo which had
hitherto worked well, he not able to como
to tho same conclusion which he had arrived 1t.
that the object or tendency of the memorial now
i'll question to strike at tho instit'~ions OF
slavery they exist in the United St2.s: IL APP
pcarcd to him that the memorial .1plicd merely
to the effects which would rcsuI. rom the annex
alton of Texas. and not to tie institution which
already exists within the present mon. II the
propositions of the M norasts applied to tho in
stituton of sIaycr rs 1t now exists IN tho Jnltcd
States. withou. reference to tho effects of adding
q FOREIGN ,.rrltory, he would not hesitate a mo-
mont Is giving his vote with his friend from
Gee 10 lay the question of reception on the table.
lie, for one, would then be ready to uphold the
'ulc in tho spirit in which it had always been re-
sorted to. But he could not think with his friend
hat tho memorial touched tho question of sa-
'cry In the United States and the rule applies
solely to tho existence of those institutions with
n tho present Union. 1t could apply to nothing
Else. Now the memorial remonstates against the
OF Texas on tho two grounds. that,
~ this annexation, the slavery which would
come with it would be an extension of what the
deem an evil and that this annex
ltion would involve the United States in a war j
with a friendly power now at peace. He I'M
ierstood it protest against the introduction,
lnder our government. of additional territory |
with slavery attached to it. 1t seemed to
nm to be nothing more than proper to permit
heso memoriasts to express their views as to the |
Effects of this measure upon government-i
lie was not disposed to place restrictions upon
no free expression of opinions coming from any
r.
fferent from those of the memorialists as to tho
fleets of the annexation of Texas on our insti-
utlons. but he thought the manner in which the
offered their opinions presented
tate of the case altogether different from that
'hich would demand the application of the rule
f the Senate.
Mr.. Berrlen found himself very reluctantly
loccd no in yyhi oh bo h,r, y