The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-06

and proper cause Of removal eectoneer for democrats
b,s can hardly be so much OF objection 10 interfere
!" ai favor Of the other party expected him 10 do H.
axnect him still 10 do IT, never shall ask his removal
on that account do not complain OF his doing il i y
NOT moi 10 apply Tor his removal i he does DO it,
Mr. BELL. lin his seat) shall apply without hesi-
Mr. TURNKEY. One word more. to correct the remark
made the other day on this question In speaking oil
the removal Of Mr. McNeyi1 spoke o. hun as having
the time that had read in the papers which had passed
through my hands connected with his removal. Upon
looking them again find that he was in the army
about that tme and he was cripple But cannot find
in any paper that he in the battle OF New Orleans,
or that he at New Orleans in the army at ALL he
was in the army, under General Jackson there is no
doubt about that but possibly may have been mistaken
in the other am still under the impression that have
seen il stated the place where he wounded but
may be mistaken 10 that
iMr DOUGLAS and Mr. BELL here made some re-
marks which will appear hereafter
Mr.. HALE. Mr. President, do not mean TO occupy
the attention Of the Senate great while reeollsct
Senate, that although senator cannot, in accordance
with his duty refer to what has been said by another
senator IN executive session. he may aude TO what he
has said himself shall, thereore,---
Mr. KING, Qnterposlng) There IS no such right. a
senator cannot say in open session what he has himself
said in executive session. any more than ne can repeat
Mr.. HALE. Mr. President, have no opinion Of my
own upon this subject; but an honorable and dis
l. in common with the whole country, refer to with
great difference, did, one OCCASION lay this down as
the ule mean the senator from Massac nearest
me- Mr.. WEBSTER land claimed that he had the right
to state In open session OF the Senate what he had said
upon particular subject in secret session, thought
Mr. WEBSTER, Tin his seat) never said that
Mr.. HALE. am certain that I am not mistaken now
Il was in the speech which the senator made on the
On that occasion the honorable senator claimed that he
had right to say what he himself had said in executive
session ! cannot be mistaken, il my. recollection is
worth anything The recollection Of the senator from
New Jersey mir DAYToNl is the same as mine.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the honorable sena-
tor from Alabama Mr. KINo] make the point OF order
red in secret session only after the obligation OF secresy
has been removed. presume that must nave oeen the
case IN the case referred TO- INV WIN ne
But in any other il is certain that there can De no
such right Il is not only breach OF order, ou. me
gosses breach of order that be conceived o. Inc
bring such matter before the public with
out coming in conflict with his oath. The reason why
there can be such rule as that stated is obvious
senator might do it, another might and the doing o.
il by would provoke and require that others should
do -as what says does not stand by ITSELF but IS
always connected with what others have said conse
queniy. all would talk, and the rule which requires Sc
cresy at all would be utterly defeated care nothing
about il, however The senator mast act on his own
responsibility merey wished to see the rule OF the
Mr. MANGUM rise to the point of order. # isl
utterly nadmssbe for any senator TO repeat his speech
exhibited in executive session. and for the single
which seems TO me decisive and which has been stated
by the senator from Alabama, [Mr. KSGl that if one
senator INDUCES in such license, another may, and in
deed must suffer his views 10 be msrepresented, with
out any remedy OF opportunity 70 reply :,,,u
the Senate to call their attention to what has been the
practice may not be out OF the recollection OF honora
Bile senators, that the honorable senator from Missouri
live session, relating to the Of General Kearny He
afterwards furnished copy OF those resolutions TO an
editor OF New York paper, in which they were pub
lished, and over the whole country That honora
Bile senator made at the same tme and upon the same
subject, what | think of his very longest
speeches, filling up the National lniegencer for days
and days, weeks and that too, furnished and
published in similar manners and no exception TO that
course, lar as ever knew, was taken IN the Senate
There was then no complaint no measures were taken
10 vndicate the Senate from this gross outrage and
breach Of senatorial propety as IL is now decided to be
and no talk was had OF any such measures. But sir
am not anxious TO repeat my speech waivelt have
another illustration thar will answer my purpose equally
well. was about to refer TO the nomination OF Mr.:
McNevn, the OF Mr.. Butler The removal Of
Mr. Butler and the appointment OF Mr.. McNevn are
matter oil history. i can refer TO them.
But II is not matter OF history what Mr.. Butler was
turned out for. As doubts entertained, however, oil
lis proprety, will not undertake to say what said,
what thought or what some others said or thought he
was turned out for because II is not In order, SIR.
The honorable senator from Massachusetts, says that
there has been much dissatisfaction IN his State
in regard TO these removals from Office had been felt
heretofore So far goes, that remark may be true,
but 10 great ways IRON speaking the wnoe tfutn MOI
only has there been dissatisfaction but great satsac
ton The principal officer removed there was the collec
tor Of the port OF Bosona who had more patronage
in his hands than all other officers together, tenfod
prominent wing was appointed in his place; and the
wings. OF course, all delighted But how did the
democrats receive III Why, sir, they reoiced
that they fred one hundred guns Boston Common at
the result The democrats so satisfied that they
thought IL ungrateul almost 10 Mr. Walker, that they
had TO pour out this ibaion TO wing Secretary for
moving that man. Now, what the heinous offence
OF that man, that caused all this Joy at his removal
That guilty of the objectionable crime OF be-
lieving that il the duty OF the government 10 prohibit
slavery from going into the Territories IL that which
united wings and democrats such grateful shouts and
peans Of thanksgiving for this removal | suppose
there is prescription in this |, mus, be admitted that
IL is prescription for wing TO turn out democrats, and
uics But they both unite in saying that II is fair
exercise OF executive power turn out free soier
tLaughter1 There is no prescription there-not the
least in the world And SIR think in this distracted
state Of the public councils, 1t is happy Circumstance
that there few Of those individuals and by acci
disputed power might be called into play, and unite the
whole country in thank sgving for it,
Now, sir, as said, cannot say what said or did in
executive session, and il is of much consequence
what did and u is not Of much consequences what
said or did. But will say that have two exceptions 10
take TO this resolution. One is that would have been
better 10 have accorded the privilege OF making the
answer N executive session but am willing 10 waive
tnai, because suppose some OF wanted 10 enghten
me people, as well 10 give light TO the Executive,
and We would not effect Both OF these objects by in.
Producing the resolution 10 executive session; and
therefore we thought il best TO have the answer in open