Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-03-16
NEBRASKA AND KANSAS.
SPEECH OF HON. 5. A. DOUGLAS,
OF ILLINOIS,

for going on tonight, and therefore we might as
well adjourn.
Several SENATORS. No, no.
Mr. HOUSTON. Then give notice that
shall take the floor after the senator from Illinois
gets through.
Mr. SUMNER. Before the debate closes, /
hope to be heard on some points.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. We shall hear the senator
from Massachusetts,, of course, upon whatever
points he may desire to speak would gladly
have agreed to an arrangement by which il should
have been understood that the vote would be
taken at any fixed time; but we found it impossi-
BILE to come to an agreement to fix any day or any
hour on which the vote should, by common con-
sent, be taken. Consequently we have thought it
was better to insist upon proceeding to vote to-
night will not occupy the attention of the Sem
ate longer than can possibly help in doing JUS
tice to myself.
Mr.. HOU SToN. Objection has been made to
my course, it seems because | evnced disin-
clination to consent to fix any particular day for
the closing of the debate | did not see any ne
cessity for doing so, and therefore | could not
consent to it. ] do not care how soon the debate
closes; hopeit will be concluded speedily; but
do not wish to have il done informally, nor in the
hurried manner in which it has been pressed on
the Senate. claim all the privileges of a sena-
tor; but am perfectly willing to consent to an
adjournment, or any other arrangement which the
Senate may make. | am in minority, but
shall yield to the will of the Senate
pretty good disposition manifested now, and we
shall be able to close the debate and proceed to the
vote in very short time.
Mr.. President, before proceed to the general
argument upon the most important branch of this
question, must say few words in reply to the
senator from Tennessee, MIR. BELL,l who has
spoken upon tho bill to-day. He approves of the
principles of the bill; he thinks they have great
merit; but he does not see his way entirely clear
to vote for the bill, because of the objections
which he has stated, most of which relate to the
Indians.
Upon that point, desire to say that it has
never been the custom in territorial bills to make
regulations concerning the Indians within the
limits of the proposed Territories. All matters
relating to them it has been thought wise to leave
10 subsequent legislation, to be brought forward
by the Committee on Indian Affairs. | did ven
ture originally in this bill to put in one or two
provisions upon that subject; but, at the sugges-
ton of many senator's on both sides of the cham
Der, they were stricken out, in order to allow the
appropriate committee of the Senate to take
charge Of that subject. 1 think, therefore, since
We have stricken from the bill all those provisions
which pertain to the Indians, and reserved the
whole subject for the consideration and action of
the appropriate committee, we have obviated
every possible objection which could reasonably
be urged upon that score. We have every reason
TO hope and trust that the Committee on Indian
Affairs will propose such measures as will do en-
the objects Of Congress III organizing these Ter
ritories.
But, sir, allusion has been made to certain In
dian treaties, and it has been intimated, if not
charged in direct terms, that we were violating
the stpua tions Of those treaties in respect to the
rights and lands Of the Indians. The senator
from Texas Mr.. HousToN made very long and
interesting speech on that subject but it SO hap
pened, that most of the Indian treaties to which
he referred Were with Indians not inchided within
the limits of this bill. We have been informed
In the course of the debate o-day, by the chair
man of the Committee OH Indian Affairs, Mr.
SEBASTIAN, that there is but one treaty in exist
ence relating to lands or Indians within the limits
of either fthe proposed Territories, and that is
the treaty with the Ottawa Indians, about two
hundred persons in number, owning about
thirty-four thousand acres ofsand. Thus it APP
pears that the whole argument of injustice to the
red man, which in the course of this debate has
called forth SO much sympathy and indignation,
is confined to two hundred Indians, owning less
than two townships of land. Now, sir, is it pos
sble that country, said to be FIVE hundred thou
sand square miles in extent, and large enough to
make twelve such States Ohio, is to be con-
signed TO perpetual barbarism merely on account
of that small number of Indians, when the bill
itself expressly provides that those Indians and
their lands are not to be included within the limits
of the proposed Territories, nor to be subject to
their laws or jurisdiction; Iwould not allow this
measure to invade the rights of even one Indian,
and hence inserted in the first section of the bill
that none Of the tribes with whom we have treaty
stipulations should be embraced within either of
the Territories, unless such Indians shall voun-
tarly consent to be included therein by treaties
hereafter to be made. Ifany senator can furnish
me with language more explicit, or which would
prove more efiectual in securing the rights of the
Indians, will cheerfully adopt it.
Well, sir, the Senator from Tennessee, in
very kind spirit, here raises the objection for me
"a hat cl,da India
the limits of these Territories with whom we have
no treaties; and he desires TO know what we are
TO do with them. ! will say TO him, that that is
not matter of inquiry which necessarily or prop
erly arises upon the passage of this bill; that is
not proper inquiry to come before the Committee
on Territories You have in all your territorial
bills included Indians within the boundaries of
the Territories. When you erected the Territory
Of Minnesota, you had not extinguished the In
dian title to one foot of land in that Territory west
Of the Mississippi river, and to the major part OF
that Territory the Indian title remains unextin-
guished TO this day In addition to those wild
tribes you removed Indians from Wisconsin and
located them within Minnesota since the Territory
was organized. 1t will be question for the con-
sideration of the Committee on Indian Affairs, and
for the action of Congress, when, in settlement and
civilization, II shall become necessary to change the
present policy in respect to the Indians. When
you erected the territorial government of Oregon,
few years ago, you embraced within il all the
Indians living in the Territory without their con-
sent, and without any such reservations in their
behalf as contained in this bill. You had not
at that time made treaty with those Indians, nor
extinguished their title TO acre of land in that
Territory, nor indeed have you done so to this
day. So IT is in the organization of Washington
Territory. You the lines around the country
which you thought ought TO be within the limits
of the Territory, and you embraced all the Indians
within those lines; but you made no provision in
respect to their rights or lands YOU left that mat
ter TO the Committee on Indian Affairs, to the In
dian laws, and to the proper department, TO be
arranged afterwards as the public interests might
require. The same is true in reference TO Utah
and New Mexico.
In fact, the policy provided for in this bill, in
respect to the Indians, is that which is now il
force in every one Of the Territories. Therefore
any senator who objects TO this bill on that scor,
should have objected to and voted against every
territorial bill which you have now in existence
We. friend from Cexas has In lei, occ.sinr