Burlington hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1845-185?, 1850-08-15
BURLINGTON HAWK-EYE.

He had heard of blood being shed in case the
government attempted to carry out certain meas
ures. Weak and feeble as he was, his voice and
his arm should be raised to support and maintain
the power and authority of the general government.
TApplause.l
The presiding officer said that if the applause in
the galleries, which in violation of the rules
of the Senate, were again repeated, he should Or
der the galleries to be cleared.
Mr. Walker said that he desired to say nothing
against the decision Of the chair, but he felt proud
that the sentiments expressed by the senator had
been applauded.
Mr. Clay resumed and continued his remarks in
denial Of the right Of any State, or the people of
any state, to set at defiance the authority Of the
General Government. He alluded to the insurrec-
ton which had taken place in Washington'S time,
III Pennsylvania; and said that then the insurgents
had, as insurgents, disunionists and traitors al
ways would do. fled from the approaching forces of
the United States. ..st.
Mr. Pearce said that the Senator from Kentucky
had declared that the amendment moved by him on
yesterday had been the immediate cause of the de-
feat of the bill. He was unwilling that any more
of the responsibility of defeating that measure
should rest upon him than he was properly charged
with. The bill, it was true, had been defeated af-
ter his ndment and ifthe law Of post hoe proptu
hoe, were to be applied, then the amendment might
be chargeable with the defeat of the bill. He had
NOV ed his amendment for the purpose of getting
rid of that inserted in the motion of the senator
from Georgia; and if, by doing, he had defeated
the bill. he willing to bear the responsibility,
and to defend his act here elsewhere, and against
! whatsoever should make the charge.
III He had given his support to the bill but not till
after great reflection. He believed the bill was
sanctioned by large majority of the people of his
state. But the BILL as it stood on yesterday, was
not the bill that was before the Senate Tuesday
He said to the friends Of the bill, when the amend
ments OF the Senator from Georgia was proposed,
that he could not support it, and that if it adj
ded to the endment of the Senator from Maine.
he would either have to vote against both, or not
vote at all. The Senator's amendment was adopted.
Mr. p. then stated his objections to the amendment
OF Mr. Dawson, and the reasons why he could not
give it his sanction. These reasons and this in
tcnton were known to the friends Of the bill, and
they could not say they were surprised when he
moved to strike it out. He had acted in support Of
the bill as lorg he could. He had his response
| biiity and own right Of independent Judgment
The Senators from Texas, when they could not get
exactly what they wanted, turned round and oy-
posed the bill. Did none OF the responsibility OF
the defeat of it attach to them? He willing to
bear his part, but if they at all responsible
he desired they should Rave their share.
He acted as he believd to be his duty. 1t was
he ana his colleague who represented the state Of
Maryland here, and nobody else. He acted as he
cnnscientiousy believed his duty required, and he
would not shrink from a defence of his action
whenever and by whomsoever it was assaied.
Mr. CLAY-Nor will / shrink from presenting the
facts stated. They form portion ofthe history Of
the case. He (Mr Clay repeated that the amend
| ment of the Senator from Maryland was the imme
date cause of the defeat Of the bill The Senator
had made no speech against Glr Dawson's amend
ment, when pending. Three times yesterday he
was approached with amendments designed to
avoid the difficulty.
Mr. Pearcs reioined, stating that he had declined
accepting notifications for his amendment because
none Of them answered his purpose. One ofthem
was presented to him by the Senator from Illinois.
This he willing to accept with a slight moditi
cation. 1t proposed that the rights of Texas and
the United states should not he prejudiced by any
thing Coniaincdin the hill. This he willing to
accept If they would insert after the word 'sishs'
the word srnSsession." He was unwilling, and he
could never consent, that the possession Of the
United States should become changed in the mean
time. He thought that in searching for the cause
Of the defeat of the bill it might be safely said that
the amendments of the Senator from Georgia was
the remote cause.