The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-03-26


Private petitions were presented by Messrs. MoR
TON dayton, HAMLIN, Donor of Wisconsin, CAss,
FELcH, and SEWARD
cHAPLAINs PUBLIC SERVICE.
Mr.. CLEMENS presented petition reInonstrat-
ing against the employment OF chaplains in the
public service
SLAVERY. SLAVE TRADE, AND FUGITIVE SLAVES.
Mr.. SEWARD presented petition, from Alba
ny, New York, praying that in any law that Con
gress may pass, in relation to fugitive slaves the
following words of Scripture may be included:
Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant
which is escaped from his master unto thee He
shall dwell with thee, among you, and in that
place which he shall choose III one OF thy gates,
where il liketh him best; thou shalt not Cypress
him.
Also, large number of petitions praying the
abolition of slavery and the slave trade IN the DIS
trct OF Columbia, and its prohibition In the Terri
tories; and against the admission of slaveStates
Mr.. MILLER presented the joint resolutions OF
the State of New Jersey, recommending harmony,
Cancellation, and compromise in the settlement oil
the difficulties existing in the national coun-
ellis; and earnestly urging upon Congress the prin,
ciples Of Washing ton's Farewell Address against
sectional parties and divisions.
EXPLANATION.
Mr. WEBSTER said that he held in his hand
scrap Of paper which was going the rounds OF the
country with his name at its head. IL was quota
ton from speech made by him in lS4S and in
which he said that he then and at all times OPP
posed to the extension of slave territory, and to
adding any aid power to the slave interests.
This extract perhaps had been quoted in the Sen
ate.
SESAroa. 1t has.
Mr.. WEBSTER said he supposed the object in
quoting il 10 show that the remarks he had
lately made in the Senate inconsistent with
the sentiments uttered by him in lS4S The man
who would quote this for the purpose of showing
any Inconsistency, must either not understand the
subject, or was not candid. In his remarks the
other day he had not said that he in favor of
the extension OF slavery, that he would vote for
any increase of the slave power. What he said was
that the pighted faith OF the Government was at
stake; it was not plighted by him, but against his
efforts; but the obligation being made, he would
carry it out in good faith. He thought this
thing more than the duty of every honest and up
right man.
Mr.. HALE said that he was the Senator who had
made the quotation. In SO doing he was not want
ing in proper respect for the Senator from Massa
chusetts. He had made charge that there was
any discrepancy of opinion between the speech Of
lS4S and the speech of 1850. The Senator said to-
day that the man who would quote this paragraph
intelligence candor Now, with all respect for
the Senator, he Mr. II. must say that he saw a
wide difference between the two speeches. The
difference was this, that the Senator says in his
speech of 1850 that he feels bound to vote for the
admission of four slave States when formed out OF
Texas. In iS4S, at the time the Senator made
his speech, the Texas annexation resolutions were
in force, and were the statute book, as we'll as
they when he made his speech in 1850 In
lS4S the Senator made avowal of the most uni
versal opposition to slavery; he made no exception
try, and no Interpretation of them by him, nor ex
plantations by others, could bind the common sense
of the people in determining whether there was any
difference not He again assured the Senator
that he made the quotation from no intention of
showing discrepancy in sentiment.
MIR. WEBSTER said that if the quotation was
not made for the purpose of showing discrepancy,
he would like TO know what else it was quoted for
In his remarks made in lS4s, he had opposed the
extension of slavery and said he would not be ac-
cessory to bringing in any slave territory.
He had mt 40 He had voted against the
because he considered il waged for the acquisition
of slave territory he had voted against the treaty
because il added slave territory to the Union and
on the adoption of the treaty which added this
territory to our Union, how did the Senator from
New Hampshire votes He (Mr. Wa would have
voted against the treaty for that cause even to this
day; and if the Senator from New Hampshire and
few others would have voted with him, the pre-
sent questions and difficulties would not now exist
After the Senator had brought this territory into
the Union, he disturbs the country by his desire to
protect the topped hills and barren hill sides
Of these territories from slavery with an act oil Con-
gross. Why did not the Senator vote To keep the
Mr.. HALE said that he sorry to be obliged
30 make an explanation. When the treaty was
under consideration, the Senator from Connecticut
had moved amendment to it, forever excluding
slavery from the Territory, and the Senator from
Massachusetts, did not vote upon the question, al
though it appears by the journal that he in the
Senate FIVE minutes before and five minutes after
the vote taken. He (Mr. II voted for the
treaty because by adopting it, he procured peace;
Tor he thought, with DIR. FRANKLIN, there could be
good war, and no bad peace. he also voted for
the treaty because he thought that If We did not
take then the territory embraced in it, the war
would go and We would have TO take still more
territory.
He did see a difference between the Senator'S two
speeches. Others the difference. The Sena-
tors late speech had been lauded and compliment
ed for it by press which never spoke Of the Sen
ator politically but in the coarsest terms of con-
demnation. This press the Washington Union
Other papers Of the same character poured forth
..t-.. -
certain he never received them from such quarter
before. The whole country had been excited by
the speech, and the difference seen by all. In
alluding TO this, he desired 70 be understood IN
no way rejecting upon the motives of the Senator
in his efforts to procure settlement OF the difhcu
ties Of the day.
Mr.. WEBSTER said this was not a question Of
motive. He sought no protection behind motives
The question one Of change OF opinion, oil
inconsistency. The Senator says he did not quote
the remark to show there any inconsistency
but he argues there is an inconsistency He says
the whole country declares there is a difference in
sentiment between the two speeches He (Mr.W.
would not ask would he take the Senators
opinion Of what was the sentiment of the country
Tic doubted, be hesitated 10 take he denied, be re
PEELED the authority which declares the sentiment
Of the country. lie (Mr. W. would not say what
the country thought Of the matter, and he thought
he was nearly competent the Senator to judge
oft. On the whole, he thought it likely that the
remarks Of the Senator originated in, If not dictated
by-thcy psTtook OF the taste, they had the odor
the perfume of-disappontment, that a certain por
ton Of the press should receive his (Mr. w's) re
marks with Appreciation.
THOMAS DENNIS.
Mr. MASON from the Committee on Naval AT
fairs, reported back House bill granting pension
Of thirty dollars a month TO Thomas Dennis for in
juries received in firing a salute the Unite
states ship Princeton, and the bill was, by unani
nous consent, considered and passed.
cALroHSrA, NEW MEXICO, ASp UTAH.
Mr.. DOUGLAS, from the Committee on Terri
tories, 20 which had been referred MIR FooTE's bill
providing territorial governments for California
Deseret, and New Mexico, and bill submitted b.
Mr.. BESTos settling the boundaries between Ney
Mexico and Texas, reported ~ a substitute for tn
same the following bills:
bill for the admission Of the State Of California
into the Union.
bill to establish the territorial governments
Utah (Deseret) and New Mexico, and for otho
purposes.
Mr.. DOUGLAS said that member Of tn
committee out Of town. The other four ha
agreed 70 report these bills, each Senator rcservn
his right to oppose certain provisions in the bill