The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-01-10

scrutiny, and after such deliberate decision that it
the pleasure OF the committee to require TO embody
in the form OF report the opinions which had been there
expressed.
In reference to the senator from Illinois, and his
appearance before the committee, desire TO say
Mr. DOWNS, Qnerposing) Will the gentleman al
low me single word
Mr. BERRlEN Certainly sir.
Mr. DOWNS. The gentleman misunderstood me.
The result OF the deliberations of the committee not
unknown. What wished 10 say was, that the reason
and Lprce of argument in the report very difficult 10
reply to, until we had seen il in form.
Mr.. BERRlEN. 1t will naturally occur to the mind
OF every that the opinions expressed in that report
having been adopted By the committee must have been
preceded by the argument which led TO the conclusion
and consequently that these points investigated and
discussed before the committee the anterior meeting by
the whole OF the committee, and that designated TO
make the report expressing those opinions
With respect TO the suggestion OF the senator from l
nos, his presence before the committee desire TO
say, that myself had conference with that senator,
but member OF the committee, understanding his
wish to confer with the committee gave it my consent
cheeriully and that the idea of hi, attendance
only abandonded IN consequence OF suggestion that he
had himself declined hope, then, that the committee
may stand acquitted OF any lmproprlety with regard to
the in which it has conducted its deliberations
with reference to this bill.
Now, sir with regard to the report of the committee
Il there any additional evidence required to prove
the improperly of the course Pusue in this discussion,
in advance OF the matters contained in this report, 1t
would be afforded by the fact that both upon questions OF
law and questions of fact there entire discrepancy
between the senator and the committee, and that there are
means, in this preliminary stage OF bringing that IN
vestgatIon to decision. The argument OF the senator
from Illinois, understand it, appears to be side Of
this report The argument of the senator might be con-
The first ground which is taken in the report IL, that
Congress does not possess the constitutional power 10
create States and that question IS argued IN the report
mary mpresson not affected by presidents in any manner
whatever Suppose, then, the senator from Illinois were
correct in exhibiting instances IN Which Congress had
fran, o1 poty tyh ri hpy ppS9ps
Mr. DOUGLAS, Gnerposng The gentleman has mis-
apprehenied my argument did not suppose that Con-
gress possessed the power to create STATE nor do al
nit that my bill proposed to create State 1t proposes
to declare that California is one OF the States OF the
Union and leave the people themselves to erect their
State government. the same in the cases alluded TO-
Mr. BERRlEN. Ii Is proposed to declare that Cali
forna is
Mr. DOUGLAS. In the Union,
Mr.. BERRlEN. in the Uhdn as one of the States of
the Union By the force and operation of this BILL
Instant upon its passage California becomes of
the States OF the Union And whether she be State
OF this Union or not State at all is the question sub
United to those who may differ with the committee
But, then, this mode of discussion is not calculated TO
lead TO any beneficial results, is further proved by the
fact, that while the senator from Illinois charges the
committee with mstakng the iacts, lie obviously com
Fms that mistake himself. The propos ton OF the COM
nee does not, in the first lace, go to the extent which
IS supposed by the senator from Illinois They have not
asserted that Congress has admitted State unless
It's constitution had been prepared advance, and laid
before Congress. No such proposition IS 10 be found in
the report The committee have asserted that the power
OF Congress TO admit a State into this Union has never
been exered In behalf Of unofgauized body OF people,
having no constitution, or law, or legitimate bond OF
union.
not take the case to which he has referred ont oil that
proposition. The reference Is to the State OF Kentucky,
apon which the senator will permit me 10 state that he
is in error as to the fact The State of Kentucky
was separated from the State OF Virginia by lesisa-
live act, in the year l7SS, authorizing AMI dec!ar
ing that portion OF the State of Virginia be a
separate State, By subsequent act in the year 7S9,
asserting that the preceding act had in some particulars
been deemed unsatisfactory aconventon was authorized
to be assembled Tor the purpose OF forming constitution
for the State, which, by the act of Virginia had been
declared be separate State; and lest the people of that
State should be, inermedatey, in state oil anarchy
10 the express words of the Legislature of Virginia
10 prevent state of anarchy from existing nterme-
lately in that portion OF the State thus severed pro-
ceeds to make certain provision Now, the convention
assembled. in Consequence OF that legislative at in the
100, and was the act of that convention thus constl
tnny the government of Kentucky in this separate State.
1t act of that convention in 1879 which brought
before the Congress Of the United States the application I'd
admit Kentucky as separate State on the day, in
June 1892. There then, from the moment when Ken
lucky separate from Virginia by her legislative act
zip TO the time when Congress legsa,el the act for the
purpose OF her admission al State, government ex-
s,iny under the authority of the legislation of Virginia
and by the assent OF the people OF heatucAy Such Is Ito.
the condition OF California.
Now, sir, with respect to the State OF Rhole islall.
She had been existing State long anterior to the ii
Of her admission, and she hal her constitution OF Rhode
Island. then, It ls not necessary TO speak further,
With regard 10 Tennessee, the gentleman IS also under
misapprehension the fact, which may be found
not by reference to the history of Tennesseefor
to which have been able to refer contains but By ref
TO the legislation OF Congress, and the public doc
unens TO be founl|n the a!olung room of the Senate
The portion OF the State of North Carolina which lies
west of the mountain, called Washington, was DESTROYS
OF being separated from the State controversy arose
and to settle it, they formed State which they called the
State of Frankland North Carolina, still asserting her
claim, by act OF December 1882 1890, ceded to the
United States this Territory of Washington, or, they
had named it, FARMLAND.
The United States accepted that cession in the year $780,
and people of the Territory held adopt
cd constitution the succeeding February, 1895, and
applied for admission into the Union These facts will
be found by reference u what called miscellaneous
Papers," in the public documents in the adjoining cham
her But the United States when they accepted the
in the year $780, proceeded to organize this terrific
ry into State and to provide territorial government
for it, under which it continued from the year 1870 till
1896, when il met in convention, formed constitution,
and was subsequently, by an act OF Congress limited
into the United States The senator from Illinois will,
therefore, how the of Tennessee presents
cepllon from the statement of the report
have advered Mr.. President, only to the cases sug
gesed this discussion, because did not propose, and
presume the Senate will not expect, that the committee,
any member OF the committee should enter into an
elaborate discussion OF all the merits of the report
bracng SO many points are necessarily involved in
this subject But with such means as possess, | am
held in that report. desire with much
iety as any other person that this unhappy qnes-
ton, which to connect itself with every subject,
should be peaceably adjusted have not believed
that was within the power OF Congress TO adjust it in
any mode proposed by the senator from Illinois; and de-
committee in the preparation OF the report and in the dis
of when shall further hearing. il