The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-02-23

the results or conclusions Of that report. have moi
read to this day, and not, therefore, prepared
to condemn it, though if had, as | nave before
attempted to show, | do not stand committed
necessarily To any part Of it. | was, at that
session, a member Of the Committee on Public
Lands, and had very heavy labor to perform on ~
and, as consequence, could not attend onen NE
meetings Of the territorial committee. ! viii no!
say, for do not remember, whether that report
ever read in committee. ! was 30 oflen absent
that il might have been read when not present
| can say this, however, for myself, that II ever
heard read at ALL in out OF committee II has es-
capped my recollection. | remember no such thing,
and am Of the belief that never heard il. That Gov
ernor Brown had authority from hs ecn'niiiies TO
make such report have no doubt; and that he may
have read it 10 the committee think quite proba-
BILE. However, being wholly unimportant, will
pass il over. Let me return For a moment to this
democratic committee Of six, and trace II ore step
further, find lpot the Journals that there we're
nine members OF the Committee of Territories,
and that the three which tie gentleman omitted to
now in my eye, Mr.. NJ. BRows,l was one,
Why this omissioni He will not venture 70 say
he did not know they were members Of the COM
ntt<e. IL is hardly reasonable TO suppose he found
the of part the journals and not the whole;
and much more unreasonable would 2 be TO suppose
that he found the names Of the six democrats AM
could not find the wings. Where find their names
the journals they all together, and mixed up at
liat; so that II had attempted TO take the and
not he other, would have been compelled 10 look
over all the names TO get them. ! DO not charge
this as an intentional omission of that honorable
member; he may be able to show that 1t acci-
dental. Ii ], however, had done so, assure this
c0im'ttee would nect Ssarlly have been Intention
al. | cannot well SD how | could have do0e
~ through mistake. Then, alr, # he 1eIhoctats
on that committee subscribed 10 the arguments
aud eonciu5ioHS Of that report, so did the
ubI fhgtE aHa
report; and If | am inconsistent, so is the gentle
mans colleague Mr.. BRouN for il the argument
advanced be CORRECT that we all bound having
virtually subscribed TO that report, you have but TO
look little further into the journals of that same
Congress-, and you will find that directly in the face
Of this Janeed cOmmIttal, his colleague voted in
sert provision into the bill directing the President
TO give the notice. and such was the vote of every
wing member then IN his seat from The State of
Tennessee. Il is very natural that | should ask
how is this What sort Of consistency does the
gentleman himself present. Why did ne fail to
state fully what appeared Of record, duplicating alike
wings well as democrats'
Mr.. Nj. BKowE rose TO make an explanation, and
was proceeding, when Mr. HoUsros learning from
the chairman that this interruption wonld be count
ed in his time, said,
Mr. Chairman, cannot yield the floor il I am to
lose the time | would gladly accommodate gen
tlemen by yielding for explanation if my time
would allow me to do | wish to do no one in
justice, and If the time not reckoned against
me, would much prefer TO hear their explanations
as | proceed. They must excuse me, however,
and take uIeir chances for the floor as | have done
Sir, minority report has been made from the
Committee on Foreign Relations at this session Of
Congress, signed by my friend from Kentucky, tMr.
@. DAVIS, by gentleman from Indiana, GMr. c. b.
SMITH, and, think, some else. The report is
not before me, and speak from memory. As I'M
derstand the conclusions, as well as the rea.
nE bat
the power to act upon the subject of the no
tice contemplated by the resolutions your table.
Yet the two gentlemen 10 whom | have referred
Mr.. G. DAVIS and Mr.. c. b. SMIrHl voted at the
last session Of the 2Sh Congress incorporate into
The bill extending our laws over the territory Of
Oregon, a provision directing the President Of the
United States to give the notice substantially as we
propose now to do it. How can they account fur
such change of opinion Will they attempt an
explanation | may DO told they did so with Il view
of destroying the bill; that they hostile to it, and
believed if the notice were inserted the bill would be
defeated Can gentlemen avoid the difficulty by such
explanation Can they reconcile such to their
own sense of proprlety and right We are now
told If we give the notice that will be the inev
table resuit-a war which will he destructive of all
the important interests of the counry-a war in
which our honor will be implicated to an unneces-
sary extent, if not furnished How can any ono
who believes these things justify before the world
or his own conscience, vote for the notice? IL will
not do TO say he wanted to defeat another bill and
thus excuse himself. Better, far better would il
have been to let the other bill pass into law, than
TO have placed so large and important a stake upon
the hazard OF "sngie die" Such a course would
in my conception, be totally ndefensibe, for our
true policy Is to meet these questions fairly and TO
ad vocate resist them their merits or demerils
in our judgment may demand. 1t is my intention
to vote against all propositions on this subject which
fail to meet the question fairly. | will not shrink
from, but will meet the responsibility In that
course believe the great body Of the people will
sustain me. If, however, should be unable to
sustain myself, will have the consolation which
proceeds from an honest intention protect and de-
fend my country.
Admit, if you please, that this is not a question
upon which this House can speak authoritatvely;
yet, hold that the executive, in discharging the
delicate and important duties growing out of it-es-
pecially under the circumstances of this case-may
with great proprety consult and advise with the
representatives Of the people In that aspect of the
case, we might not be bound to give him our opin-
ions or advice; yet, if we should refuse it, our
people would condemn US, and rightly, in my
judgment. Look if you will but for a moment into
the true state Of the question. No president has
offered to give the notice without submitting
to Congress The House of Representatives of the
last Congress, and prior to the installation of the
present President, assumed to have jurisdiction Of
this subject, and passed provision which was sent
to the Senate, directing the President of the United
States to give the notice; and the Senate have had
before them, Of their accord, similar PROPOSE
tions-have entertained and debated them-thereby
recognising the question of notice as n legislative
matter and as within their jurisdiction. These
things arc all OF record, and are spread out upon
your journals and known to the President and the
country: Now it ia gravely insisted that the pres
cnt Executive shall take the whole responsibility
upon himself Even surprising the President
felt that he had the power under the constitution to
give the notice: is 1t fair reasonable to expect in
the face of all these facts that he should have given
it without saying a word to, consulting Con
.gress' Do you not ask Of him too muchi II he has
erred it is the side ofsaety Suppose he had given
the notice and involved the country in war: he would
have been censured and abused throughout the length
and breadth Of this country; and by those of both
parties who attempting rest the entire respon-
sby upon him. He would have been denounced
arrogating to himself power "not conferred upon
him by the constitution and laws, but in derogaton
# boh," for thus attempting to grasp and cOnccn-
trae in his own hands the power Of peace and war
He did not pursue that course, and avn glad that
he did not; nor does he propose to avoid re-
sponsibility. He tells you the notice should be Civ
en-. What more could he say' 1t is a fatal mistake
10 supuose that we can avoid this question. The