The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1852-07-22

But, while Mr.. Pierce was anxious to put
through all these resolutions, Mr.. Clay and
other Slayeholdng Senators thought the fifth
and sixth too sweeping and unguarded and he
moved substitute, directed only against inter
ference by the citizens OF one State with the
institutions OF another, containing no declaration
that attempts TO bring about the abolition of sla-
very here "were direct and dangerous attack
upon the Institutions of all the Slayeholding
States" but recognising, in express terms, the
! duty OF Congress to receive and resrectfully
treat all petitions, in decorous language, against
slavery in the District This substitute was
adopted, with some slight modfcatlon-l9 IL
| lS-Mr. BuCHANAN and Mr.. CLAY voting yea
Mr.. CALHOUN and Mr. Pierce, nay.
Subsequently, the substitute was divided, and
its various parts amended and adopted success
| sively-Mr. CALHOUN and Mr.. PIERCE gener
ally voting together.
| On motion of Mr. Preston of South Carolina
the sixth resolution of Mr.. Calhoun was LAID
| upon the table, on the ground that this branch
| of the subject would be more appropriately dis
cussed IN connection with the resolutions intro
duced by him for the annexation OF Texas to
! the Union. The vote stood 80 to 9-thiS time
Mr.. PIERCE voting with the great majority
against Mr.. Calhoun
January 3, 1888, two petitions were present
ed-one against the annexation of Texas and
the admission of any new State toleratng sla-
very; the other for the abolition of the inter
State slave trade. The motion to receive was
laid upon the table-Mr PIERCE voting ndy,
in accordance with his policy, which was. 10
receive all such petitions, and lay them on the
| l. L..
January 9, 1888, Mr.. Prentice presented
resolutions of the Legislature Of Vermont,
against the annexation of Texas, against sla-
very in the District and Atheron'S gag; and
he moved that they be laid upon the table and
be printed. The first part OF the motion pre-
vailed; and Mr.. Lumpkin then moved 10 lay
upon the table the motion 10 print. This was
carried, and a sovereign State was thus insult
ed by the following vote-yeas -, nays 8
FRANKLIN PIERCE voting yed.-C Congressional
Globe, 1889, p. ITO.
February &, 1888, Mr. Morris presented a
resolution, directing the Committee on the Ju-
dietary TO inquire into certain matters pertain
ing TO the institution Of slavery in the States
and Territories, and report thereon TO the Sen
ate. Some of the Slaveholding members, with
their Northern allies, manifested desire TO re-
fuse lis reception, but the rules of the Senate
forbade this. Mr.. Calhoun's resolutions, in De
cember, had been respectfully received, laid
upon the table. and ordered to be printed. The
resolution of Mr.. Morris was at last laid
upon the table but, seeing the hostile DISPOSE
ton Of the Senate, he withdrew his motion Il
print.
The Friday following, the resolution wa
, called up and Mr.. Morris expressed desire t
address the Senate but Mr.. Norvell moved 1
, lay the question of its consideration on tn
table. Mr.. Buchanan requested him TO with
draw it. Nobody would miSapprehend his pc
sition on this subject OF abolition, hut he wa
in favor of fair play. Mr.. Clay had been per
mted TO address the Senate at length the day
before, on presenting memorial against abo
liton aud he thought the Senator from OhlC
had right to be heard in reply. After that
they could readily dispose of the subject
This was certainly fair proposition, anC
creditablc TO Mr.. Buchanan, but Noryell per
sisted in his motion and the Senate, y TO ~
voted to lay the question of consideration oil
the table thus applying the gag to Mr.. Nor
ris, and virtually denying free speech 10 OHIO
f while il recognised ii in Kentucky. Mr.. Plerc
voted yea, together with Mr.. Calhoun and hi
special friends, against Mr. Buchanan. Mr.
Clay, and other advocates Of " fair play"
We have presented the record of Mr.. Pierre
as a Representative and Senator IN Congress
During his two terms in the House, and unit
he resigned his seat in the Senate, he was al
ways true to the Slave Power, and gave no vo
which subjected him to its displeasure or sus
f pcIon
1t may be said that others in those day
voted as he did, who since then have shown
their devotion TO Freedom. True, but he ha
continued unchanged. When John p. Hale
his intimate friend for twenty years, faithful 4
{ his convictions of right, denounced the annex
r alton of Texas, in defiance OF the edlcts OF hi
S party, Mr.. PIERCE, trampllng under foot h
+ long standing friendship. turned upon the ind
q pendent Representative, followed on his trac
# with relentless hostility, utterly prescribed hln
q and compelled the Democratic press OF h
\ Stale TO eat its own words on that questlo
From that time he has been the leader of Il
, Hunker Democracy of New Hampshire; al
when Mr. Atwood, the regular nominee of ii
Democratic party, frankly avowed his disaI
probation Of the Fugitive Slave Law, M
I Pierce attempted, first To Drowbeat him into
retraction of his honest words, and then led o
> the Party in the work of making new nom
nation, of ascertained devotion to the Slave
holding Interest.
On a public occasion in New Hampshire
after the passage of the Adjustment measure
by Congress, he ayowed his entire approbatio
Of them; and the newspapers recorded the hlg
praise awarded by him TO Mr. Webster for hi
7th Of March speech.
In letter TO Major Lally, dated May q,
few DAYS before the late Convention, whic
was doubtless designed to be used in that body
| b, far hn cpEn pi nIv
ton and strength to the men who in New
Hampshire had fought the battle for the Fugl
tive Law and Compromise, the Democracy o
he nation ought TO endorse these measures
This letter was read at the Ratification Meet
ing in this place, by Mr.. Richie, as follows
"TRrMoNr House. BosroN, May y, 1852.
ct intende,t to sneak 10 Won more fully upon th'
subject Of the Compromise Measures than had M
| opportunity 10 do The importance Of the action %
| tho Convention upon this question cannot be over
estimated. believe there will BIO no disposition OF
the part of the South TO press resolutions unnecessa
rly offensive to the sentiments OF the North. But chI
| We saw as much on our side viii the North com,
cheerfuIly up to the mark Of constitutional right
not a breach in our party is inevitable Tho matter
should be met nj the threshold because IL risc
above party and looks to the very existence Of thu
Confedcracy The sentiment Of no one State is to BE-
| regarded upon this subject but having fought thu
battle in New Hampshire upon the Fugitive Slave
Law and upon what we believe TO be the ground o.
constitutional right we should Of course desire the
approval of the Democracy of the country. What
wish to say to you is this If the Compromise Meas
ures are not TO be substantially and firmly maintain
ed the plain rights secured by the Constitution viii
be tramplcd in the dnst What difference can IL make
to you or me whether the outrage shall seem to fall
on South Carolina, Maine, or New Hampshire
Are not the rights of each equally dear to us all
will never yield to n spirit that, from consld
cratons Of policy, would cndnngcr the Union. En-
Pertaining these views the action Of the Convention
must in my Judgment, be vital five OF the North
who have stood by the constitutional rights OF Tho
South are TO be abandoned TO any time-scrying pol
cv tho homes of Democracy and Of the Union mus