The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-20

PROTEST
The Senate having under consideration the motion by
Mr. HUNTER that the protest against the passage o the
California bill, presented by him Wednesday last be
received and spread upon the Journal
Mr HUNTER SAID MIR. President, there have been
classes OF objections made this morning 10 the motion
TO insert his paper upon The record One them, con-
iess, | expected TO hear They made yesterday,
and expected 10 hear item repeated for upon these con
sdsratons, tn me- depend the merits OF the
case mean those which relate to the expediency and
propnely OF permitting precedent, which might here
alter grow INTO usage, relation TO the insertion OF
protests upon the Journal But sir, for the other con
Tess was prepared for il did TO me that there
was nothing IN that protest which the Senate any por
ton OF the Senate, could take a reflection upon their
motives or upon themselves II is true that dissent,
and dissent strongly from measure which has received
The assent and approval OF other gentlemen and per
haps impossible, on any occasion, 10 present for
dissent which might not, by ingenuity of constrnc-
ton, be tortured into the conclusion OF Impugnng the
motives Of those who held the other side of the
We say that we believe these things be unconstitn-
tona that believe that they violate the constitutional
rights OF our constituents; but we nowhere say that We
believe that those who voted for them voted for them
with that opinion 1t is difference of opinion which
express and we do not question in the least degree the
motives Of any who may have voted differently from
in relation to this bill We say that these are our
opinions OF the tendencies OF these measures and Tor
that reason we voted against them; but we have not in
tended TO impue 10 other gentlemen impure motves
have pretended say that they voted for them think
ing they would have the effect which suppose they
will have Now, tina, the true construction OF ii 1t
mere expression OF difference OF opinion between gem
temen in relation 10 this matter. Objections have been
taken TO particular passages which will be found npon
examination not to warrant the construction which has
been placed upon them The from Michigan OBJ
Jects to this passage:
Because the right of the saveholdng States a com.
mon and equal enjoyment OF the territory Of the Union has
been defeated by of which, without the
authority Of precedent of law, Of the constitution,
manesrly contrved for that purpose, and which
Congress mnst sanction and adopt should this bill become
a law.
Now sir, this clause relates not TO system of
contrlved and adopted here Far from il Ii is else
prp ,uCl m
tivedn Calliona-paIt.y arising out OF the action of
tie executive branch oil this government, and partly
gna with The people there and say that We think
tba, Congress, by passing such law this, would be
adopting and sanctoning that system OF measures. We
do not say that the gentlemen who voted FOR The bill
thought They doubtless thought otherwise but
we entertained these opniohs we could not vote for or
Mr. CASS The honorable senator referred to me,
think, by mistake
Mr.. HUNTER | ask pardon of the senator from
Michigan meant TO say the senator from Wisconsin,
[Mr WALKER.l But, Mr. President The senator from
North Carolina mr. BADGERl referred to another para.
graph, which he seemed to think the most Objectionable.
Il IS this:
Ia view of all these the une rsigned IRE
constrained believe that this could be
brought to admit Siae presenting itself under such cir
Sanns g aysbad@s states from ali ooaounisv Of
seulng with their properly In thai territory.
And he seemed think that this clause imputed 10
every who voted for the admission of California that
Intention and purpose. BY no means But II asserts
ihs that unless there were persons here who did vote
from such considerations united with others who voled
for from other consde raiions, this bill could
have passed. ! presume that nobody will dispute that
theeare gentlemen here who voted upon such consider
a,ions AMI voted conscentousy upon such considera
tons believe they will admit it. and consider II right
10 sanction any system OF measures which excludes
slavery, and to reject any system which allows the
slavehoding States to extend themselves equally with
others The support of the bill was made up OF different
parties, OF gentlemen acting from different motives But
THIS to say that we believe that but for The IN
uence OF the anti slavery feeling here, Territory pre-
under circumstances
been presented could have been received Stale
into this Union. That is what we mean 10 say might
ask the senator from North Carolina il he believes IL
could have been admitted here, presenting itself under
such circumstances il IT bad come here with constu-
ton admitting slavery do not ask him as TO his own
vote, but as 10 his belief.
Mr.. BADGER. have the strongest reason believe
that II would not have been admitted The honorable
senator will understand that did not undertake TO inyes
tgae whether the propositions stated there or
not. stated precisely that they might be correct
have my opinion ABOUT that, and be has his bu. m
tended TO be understood that here statement as 10
the motives supposed TO govern one more
The whole OF the members OF this body who voted for
The bill; and if the Senate puts that statement on the
record will II not follow that If these gentlemen desire
10 put their proposition in the record, IT must
be put there aso That the purpose Tor which
Mr. HUNTER 1 shall come TO that presently. ]
only referred to II for the purpose of showing that did
not necessarily carry with reflection on the motives
Of any gentleman. believe there gentlemen here
who would take il a compliment, rather than rehec-
lion their motives To have II said that they bad acted
such and who tnlnk would be dong
what right and proper to act such considerations
But we were far from mpunDg j, TO all who voted for
the bill j. that legitimate inference or deduction
from this passage But sr there is another passage 10
which the senator from Wisconsin tMr. WALKERl OBJ
jecs for the sane reasons. II Is this;
But lastly we dissent from this bi and soemnly protest
contrary former precedent obvious policy, 10 the spirit
and Of constitution Of the United Safes for the
purpose excluding the saveholdng states from the Terri
ioy thus be erected state, this government IN
effect declares that The exclusion Of slavery from the terri
rory Of the United States obecso high and impouan
as 70 Justify disregard not only OF all the principles OF
sound policy, but also OF the constitution itself
Wen, s,r, we were expressing opinion in relation
only 10 what The constitution is and not mpung 10 those
gentlemen who supported the bill that they voted against
their own belief as to the constitution. Blu, we say that
Tor to have sanctioned II would have been 10 have
sanctioned measure having this tendency and purpose
and II in this point OF view that gentlemen should
view in looking into the paper see whether its con
tents are respectful not But, sir, submit that the
nothing to do with the question whether shall 20 upon
the journal or not No gentleman is responsible for the
protest except those who signed it. All they response.
bic tor in voting for Il is the establishment OF prece
dent far makes any, on which others can claim
similar ayors hereafter Now that rs the whole question
involved the controversy seems 10 me and come
to that branch Of it, 1t has been said that because
thing Of the sort had never occurred the sixty years
OF our experience, we should be cautious how we adopt
precedent which may lead to a departure from that
practice. Sir acknowledge that there ~ great justice
and force in that remark We ought to be cautious now
we depart from our pecedens, or establish anything
like new rules but not because OF what occurred
at the time OF the formation OF the constitution oi
Yha IatgaA - tkn (Ynrp NnFfh