The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-12-25

4
are all agreed that the people should be left free
TO regulate their Institutions in their own way,
subject only to the Constitution. He believed
they could only legislate upon Slavery in their
sovereign capacity and Constitution making
power. There was no Squatter Sovereignty in
that bill, but he was willing to abide by the de-
cision of the court, as to the power of the Ter
ritories to legislate upon that subject.
Mr.. Davidson entered into an argument to
show that Congress had not now, and never had,
the power to legisate on the vexed question of
Slavery in the Territories, expressing his belief
that the history in the Presidents message of
the troubles which had existed in the country
for the last year was true to the letter.
Friday, December l9, 1856.
SENATE.
The Presidents message being under con-
sideration, Mr.. Wilson, of Massachusetts, COM
mented upon it at length.
Mr.. W. defended the Republican party against
the charges contained in the message, which
were levelled against the honesty and sincerity
of nearly fourteen hundred thousand American
voters. He defined the difference between the
Republican party and the Garrison Abolition
lists on one side, and the Republican party and
the Gerrit Smith Abolitionists on the other.
| Mr.. Garrison believed that the Constitution was
purely Pro-Savery instrument, and therefore
abstained from voting. Mr.. Smith held that it
was an Anti-Slavery instrument, to such an
| extent that the Supreme Court, under and in
virtue of Its provisions, might declare the eman-
cipation Of all the slaves in the Union. In
opposition reports the National hteIiigencer)
| to both of these inconsiderable parties the
Republicans held that the Constitution gave to
Congress no power over Slavery in the States,
but did confer jurisdiction over the Territories,
oo6H anti 80 IL -.
of Slavery to Territories which were free. This
power the Republicans believed was colstitu-
tional, and, being so, they meant to exet it in
| behalf of Freedom. 1t was true that the Repub-
licans were opposed to Slavery in every form,
! and wherever found but they recognized the
right of the States to hold their bondnen,if they
| thought ieright or expedent to do So He had
enjoyed peculiar facilities in the late canvass
for ascertaining the sentiments of his political
friends, and he had yet to learn that single
one of their speakers or presses had countenan-
ced the idea of touching Slavery in the States.
He challenged contradiction on this point.
The speaker then reviewed the doctrines of
the Republican party as defined by the Philadel-
phia Convention, and quoted clause of their
platform, which was intended to discaim the
| right of interfering with Slavery in the South
The Republican party was pre- eminently State
Rights party, and granted to the South. as it
claimed for the North, all the immunties of
State sovereignty. He repudiated the imputa-
| ton of disunionism which it was attempted to
cast on the Republicans, and thought such a
charge came with an i'll grace from the party
which numbered in its ranks nearly every
avowed disunionist in the United States. He
quoted from speeches of Mr.. Toombs, Mr..
Slidel, Gov. Wise, Mr.. Brooks of South Caro-
lima, and others, for the purpose of discovering
yUh m no rfcfc tbo
He also replied to portions of the recent
speeches delivered in the Senate by Messrs.
Butler, Mason, Rusk, Brown, and Cass. He
denied that the Republican party was sectional
in its principles or its aims. 1t sought to bene-
fit the white laborer of the South no less than
of the North, by retaining the free Territories
as the common heritage of both. He quoted
from the returns of the last census to show that
while only two hundred thousand men of the
North had gone to the South, six hundred
thousand natives of the South had emigrated
to the free North. Free laborng men would
ever shun contact and fellowship with Slavery.
The Republicans had no feeling of hatred to
the South. All Southern men were treated
with courtesy ard kindness when they visited
the North, even though they came to utter
opinions contrary to the taste and consciences
Of a great majority of Northern citizeus Bat
what citizen Of the North, he asked, conld nqx'
utter the sentiments and maintain tke pxjhs,
ciples avowed by Jefferson, Madison, or Wei
ington, in the State which had given birth 10.
these fathers of the Republic? There was no
! freedom of speech or Of opinion at the South
in the matter of Slavery. In support of this
assertion be cited the case of Mr.. Underwood,
driven from Virginia for attending the Repub-
| licen Convention at Philadelphia, of Professor
Hedrick, expelled from his chair in Southern
University for writing q temperate letter in
favor of Mr.. Fremont and the principles of the
Republican party, and other such examples.
| The speaker then proceeded to consider the
results of the last election, and the manner in
which it had been conducted by the Democra
cy of the North. He gave notice that agita-
ton would not cease with regard to Kansas,
and never would cease until it should be ad-
mitted as free State. The election of Mr..
Buchanan was no endorsement of the Kansas
Nebraska BILL for the Democratic party of the
North had avowed themselves in favor of Free
| Kansas" He believed that in 1860 the public
| opinion Of the country would be ripe for the
principles and policy of the Republican party;
spd thought that the people of the South would
better suDserZe their true interests by divertng
their attention from the expansion of Slavery,
and by seeking rather to develop their material
resources and to amelorate the social and
| moral condltlon OF the slaves, III which they
would have the cooperation, the sympathy,
and the prayers, not only of the North, but of
all philauthropists and Christians throughout
| the world.
| HOUSE.
| Amongst the bills reported, was one by Mr..
Lane, of Oregon, to make provision for pay.
ments under C treaty with the Rogue River In
| dams of that Territory. Several private bills
were reported from the Committee Of Claims,
upon cases decided by the Court of Claims Re-
ports OF bills were made from various other
committees, and bills On the Speakers table
were appropriately referred.
| The House then went into Committee OF the
| Whole on the private calendar. After much dis
cussion, two bills were laid aside to be reported
| to the House. One of these was for the relief
| of the widow and children of Samuel r. Thurs
ton; g former Delegate from the Territory of
| Oregon.
The House resisted, by large and upprece-
dented majorities, on such o question, 50 early
| in the session, two several motions to adjourn
over till Monday.
Adjourned.
Saturday, December 20, 1856,
SENATE.
Senate not in session.