The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-19


on and elected him a senator but that did not make
him senator California formed her State constitution
and elected two senator's but they We're no more senators
than Mr.. Weghtman was until Congress recognised Cali
fornia State Of this Union There is difference IN
principle between the two
Mr.. BROWN Were they paid
Mr.. BELL. Yes sir
Mr.. BROWN Not until after the State admitted.
Mr.. BELL. | believe So
Mr., BADGER. But they were paid for back time
Mr.. BELL. The payment reverted back by relation TO
the time of their arrival here under their election On
what principle did Congress pay the delegates roia ore
gon and Utah. and Minnesota They came here, teenl-
cay and legally speaking not delegates not as poii-
cal representatives recognised such by the laws OF the
country but Congress thought was just TO them and to
the inhabitants Of the Territories who sent them here TO
present their claims and represent their interests that they
should be paid Say If you WILL that il done on The
ground OF beity and generosity and that we were un-
der no obligation to do SO but ask when you have
recognised the principle that you viii pay under such cir
cumstanees, on what ground VIII you discriminate against
Mr.. Weightmanl
Mr. BROWN | should be very sorry If the gebteman
who elected and returned here senator from New
Mexico should imagine for moment that IN voting against
this amendment entertain any but the kindest possible
feelings for HIM entertain very kind and friendly feel
nQs for him But where is this thing 10 stop2 Arc a
handful Of people somewhere in an norganzea ter
ritory, regular Territory tfor IL is altogether map
propate speak Of New Mexico NJ that period as terri
tory; il was solely unorganzed country1 to be allowed
get together go through kind OF farce OF eeeng
somebody here whom they call senator and some one to
the House of Representatives. 10 be called member OF
Congress- And then pay those persons not be-
they had the least shadow Of claim earth to seats
here in the other end Of the CaptolY Why SIR, un-
derstand there many two three delegates here
now from the proposed Territories of Nebraska and Kansas
Are they 10 be paid2 And you to pay anybody who
here from any portion of country whether inhabited
not2
Wherever there the shadow Of authority wherever there
is the slightest pretext in law for anybody come here
such is my respect for the purity Of the ballobcx that in
all willing pay both parties lest snch
tests shall not be brought forward and fairly investigated
yet think even that has been carried far believe 1t
is certainly going entirely too far to talk of paying two
here by the legislative body Of New Mexico
There was no Legislative body there that time
stiueney send them State pretended State but
handful of people get together and through the
ridiculous farce of sending 10 Congress and
pay those whom they send One of the gentle
who Thus chosen TO 10 this body took a
sensible view of it He said win go Washington
This is State and there is nobody here TO make
State
submit sir that this does at all compare with
that of the State Of California There the people organ
lied a government, and YOU admitted them a State.
Then after you admitted the State you paid the senator's
their per diem The payment may have related back to
the Of election but in the act Of admitting the State
You made valid the previous action of the people Here
YOU repudiatedstheir whole action You did
slider IT, The action Of the people in New Mexico was
considered all in either house of Congress The
whole thing looked upon ridiculous 1t is said
that the member whom they to the other house was
paid If So IL wrong; and one wrong cannot justi-
~ another.
Mr. BELL How about Minnesota
Mr.. BROWN. In the of Minnesota according to
my recollection the delegate admitted There
law authorizing his election but he admitted to the
floor Of the House. But allowing that there may
have been half dozen precedents in that House viii
they Justify us2. say you setting in the Senate
OF the United States precedent You doing for
yourselves an act which stand precedent through
all after-,e You Justify 1t by pointing
similar TO ii in the other house OF Congress.
have very high appreciation Of Mr.. Weightman lie
delegate in the House OF Representatives when was
member of that body like bin very much and il he
could get this money quietly without my having to say
do anything in regard 10 IL should be very willing that
he should have it but vote for such preposi
ton as this because think il is wrong.
Mr. MASON. Mr. President we all know very well that
the acquisitions made from Mexico by the treaty Of peace
government Sir California, before she either Terri
tory State assembled convention, under the coun-
sells and recommendations Of the federal Executive, dc
cared herself State elected members legislature and
that legislature elected this body and the
pense of the election paid out Of the military chest
and that payment sanctioned by the government
Az has been well said by the honorable senator from
Tennessee when the honorable gentlemen who came here
claiming he for California presented their
dentih at your table they senators than was
the gentleman whose payment is esntcnded fornot
State TO the gentlemen who represented her senators
butsueh condition under and the
snion Then, what done2 California was against
my judgment admitted State and the gentlemen
whom she sent here senators not only paid their
full allowance for daily wages but their mileage also da-
ting back from the day OF their arrival in Washington and
therefore, in that instance was legalized
Now, what was done In the Territory Of New Mexico
Before that was either Territory organized such
State under the counses Of the Executive the people
there attempted TO erect themselves into State const-
tuted legislature elected two senators and member TO
the House Of Representatives and sent them here One
came claiming TO be senator; the gentleman who was
elected representative also How il differ
from the California case? Both sprang MP under the
hotbed Of executive recommendation One sanctioned
but the other not But does that fact involve in the
slightest degree the principle Of payment the eNnedi-
cncy or justice Of the payment | cannot see t.
Sir this government unsettled 10 its foundations BY
the actions Of the late administration connected with the
acquisitions from Mexico Yet il was all legazed all
sanctioned Gentlemen came here representing claim
ing 10 represent Utah and Oregon in the position
without any shadow ofauthority in Law e the exgency
OF the have been admitted by Congress and
having been sent here in that capacity their expenses
paid though they had been legally elected Now
dcrtand the honorable senator from Illinois says that
only who elected senator from New Mexico came here
and the member who elected 70 the House here
That member paid and yet It said that
not pay this because Il viii set bad precedent
Sir the precedent from the time the California sem
atOrs were treated senators pro They were
paid from The day Of their arrival in this city The prece
dent vas set In the Of The delegates from Utah and
Oregon before territorial governments organized
and il Is perfectly iunnoeria in my conception whether
hey legazed not as States or Territories The
principle Is the same and The Justice is the same
Mr.. CLAYTON Tho precedent set let me tell my
friend from Virginia long before the California The
precedent far back the time when began
TO admit rev States DO not wish 20 go back quite that
far; could mention number Of very readily but
viii content myself with referring TO with which am
somewhat familiar happened 70 I've the chairman of the
Committee the Judiciary in the years 1885 and 1886
The bill for the admission Of Michigan into the Union
referred TO the committee of which was a member We
"A Al H. r.