Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1855-03-04
Masbingtpn gentiueI.
PROCEEDINGS IN CONGRESS.

In SENATE, FRIDAY, February %, 1855.
Extracts from the debate, in the Senate, on
the bill reported by Senator Toueey, of Con
necticut, from the Judiciary Committee, to pro-
tect officers and other persons acting under
the authority of the United States.
Mr. WADE, of Ohio, concluded his remarks
by saying:
am no agtator l resist aggression, but
promote it not. / have been content TO legis-
late here within the pale Of the Constitution OF
the United States, saying but very little, and
combining myself 10 the narrow duties that
seemed to devolve on me here. | could wish
that all others might do the same thing; but
if you will agitate, if you will stir up the feel.
ing, If you will usurp jurisdiction over the free
people whom represent, / am here to meet
you hand to hand, to dispute inch by inch, be.
cause, as | know, am backed by free PEG.
pie who will suffer death before they will sur
render their rights.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. Mr.. President, the Sena-
tor from Ohio, who has just taken his seat,
Mr.. WADE, says he regrets exceedingly that
tais session should not have been allowed to
pass away without the negro question as he
calls it, being introduced to disturb our har
mony. | cordially unite with him in those ex-
pre'sions of regret. But how has the negro
question been brought here? Surely not BY
my friend from Connecticut, Mr.. ToUcEY, or
by his bill. There is not a word or line in the
bill which has the slightest, the remotest allu-
sion to that question.
Mr.. BADGER. Will the Senator allow me
t. tell him that there is distinct and une.
qnivocal allusion to it in the word "coor,"
which has been introduced into the bill
Laughter. 1t occurs in the clause "any law
OF the United States, or under color thereof"
Laughter.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. / suppose that it is GER
tainly the clause of the bill, if any, upon which
our sensitive colleagues have managed to rouse
themselves into such a passion because of the
supposed enormties of the measure. What,
Sir, is the bill? 1t is a simple provision that
when case is pending in the State courts,
which arises under the laws Of the United
States, it may be transferred into the Federal
courts. That is all. Is that principle new in
our legislation? 1t has already been shown
that in some cases it has existed for many
wears; Tor forty years it has been on the statute
book. In what, then, consists the objection to
extending to other cases a principle which has
been applied without objection for such long
time in those cases? If this bill be such an
invasion of the rights Of the States as calls
upon Senator from the great State Of Ohio
to invite and urge rebellion against the Federal
authority, why has he not mustered his forces
and marshalled them against the Government
OF the United States during the last forty
years, when the same outrage, as he calls it, ha.
been constantly inflicted rs often as a case
arose in the State courts which was transferred
TO the Federal courts?
But, sir, the Senator has become the great
champion of State rights. What invasion OF
State rights is here to be found? Surely his
~ L M
understand State rights to be the preserva.
ton of all those reserved rights which the Con
stitution Of the United States has not coded Ia
the Federal Government. Has not the Con,
stitution provided for tho Federal courts exer-
clsing jurisdiction in cases arising under the
laws of the United States The Constitution
provides that, the judicial power shall extend
10 all cases in law and equity, arising under
this Constitution, the laws Of the United States
and the treaties made, or which shall be made
under their authority" The provision is in s.
many words, declaring that the Federal jurs
diction should extend to all cases arising unde
the laws of the United States. Now, this bill
only provides that a case arising under III,
laws OF the United States in State court ma
be transferred to the Federal courts, in orde
that the jurisdiction Of those courts shall hay,
the same extent that the Constitution of th,
United States expressly declares it shall have
Then the Senator's argument is not agains
this bill his passion is not against the PROV
sions OF this bill, but against the Constitution
of his country, which he has sworn to support
Perhaps it might have been well for him Il
have looked into the enormity OF that Constitu
ton before he pledged his honor and his con
science to his Maker TO carry it into effect
The same remark is true in regard 10 In,
law for the surrender Of fugitive slaves. II,
III al. IL. -. -. a
executing a law of the United States Is i
an objection that our legislation here is in
tended TO carry out the laws and the Consttu
ton Of the country What man who is loya
TO his country-what man who regards hi.
oath to support the Constitution-what MAJ
who claims TO be good citizen. can rise and
assign rs his objection to bin that II Is H.,
tended TO execute the laws Of the land? Thai
Is the only objection which the Senator assigns
Ii is the gTdrdmen of his change? He wants
to know if / am prepared to DENY that the Oh.
ject Of this bill is to enable the constituted au.
thorities 10 execute the laws which have been
passed in pursuance Of the Constitution? No.
sir; | am not prepared TO deny that such i
the object Of this bill. II is not confined 10
the fugitive law alone, but extends TO all cases
where il is necessary to protect the officers OF
the United States in the execution Of the laws
Of the United States. ! am in favor of the
bill for the precise reason that the Senator
from Ohio is opposed to it. to wit that its OBJ
ject is 20 execute the laws, to prevent anarchy.
to put down rebellion and violence against the
constituted authorities Of the country Little
did expect to hear it avowed in the Senate
chamber, that n proposed law was monstrous.
because il was to be made in aid of the fulfill.
ment Of the Constitution and laws Of the
Union. lie thinks il is monstrous that man
in Ohio, who has a suit, should be liable to
have il transferred into the federal courts. Now,
does not the Constitution provide FOR that
transfer whenever the case Is between the citi.
zen OF the State and the citizen Of another
State ? The Constitution says. in So many
words, that the jurisdiction Of the courts OF the
United States shall reach that case. This law
is proposed to be enacted for the purpose OF
carving ont that express proyision of The Con