Washington telegraph., 1856-05-28

am personally concerned, if the committee
will give me an opportunity, when the gen
tleman has concluded his remarks.
Mr.. Walk. If the gentleman from Ten
nessee will allow me for one single moment
desire to state what will be in the recolec
tlon of many gentlemen here. that | was
not IN the House when the final vote on the
election of Speaker was taken, and there.
fore the statement of the gentleman from
Tennessee, (Mr. Smith. that voted against
4 Governor Aiken cannot be correct.
Dir. Smith. I would like to know where
the gentleman was? He was in the House
Immediately before the vote was taken.
Mr.. Walk. was not.
Mr.. Zollicoffer My colleague has the
ory with regard to the Democratic party
which l wish to examine. In his speech
the other day, and in the one to which he
then alluded, made at the last Congress. he
laid down the strict constructions of the
constitution-that its elementary principles
have ever been the same-that it is true
and sound national party. and should be
relied upon to protect the interests. and
rights of the South. In this connection
remember that, having assumed that l had
attempted to throw discredit upon the Dem
ocratic candidate for Speaker (Mr. Rich
ardsOD, he asks if it is not time that these
assaults upon the sound Democrats of the
North should cease? think it demon
strable that these positions of my colleague
are all more or less talacions.
But first, word as to Mr.. Richardson
My so called assault" consisted merely in
propounding questions which drew from
him his own real opinions He disclosed,
that he was still the advocate of the consti-
tutionality of the Wilmot Proviso, and that
under certain circumstances he had, in 1850,
pledged hiself to vote for it; but that he
now repudiated the pledge to vote for the
Wilmot Proviso which was really much
gratifed at, for L have long regarded the
est of the Northern Democrats. so regard
other prominent Democrats of that State,
at the head of whom stand Senators Doug
las and Shields. But, while 1 concede
this, is it not my right. nay my duty, to
point out the yet very unsoundness of their
actual recorded opinions? If such expo
surcs embarass them, or gentlemen who en-
dorse and support them. it is not my fault,
but the fault of the political records they
have made for themselves. For example,
l have sketch of speech before me,
which Gen. Shields made in defence of the
Nebraska bill at Springfield, Illinois, in the
fall of 1854, which appeared in the WASH
ington Union of October %, of that year.
Now, remembering that the Nebraska bill
is the present Democratic platform. this ex-
tract is important Here it is, see upon
what ground he defends the measure. He
said:
kansas and Nebraska were free uoto
and the people there would keep them free
The establishment of slavery in those Ter
ritories was not Only improbable, but ans-
possible. that it was always wiser and better
to let people work out great good for them
selves than have it forced upon them by 9th
ers; and this was the way in which freemen
always do what is great and good, by their
own free and voluntary act. The princi-
piles of fnon-interveDtion would not only keep
Kansas and Nebraska what they are now
-free-but would by Its full and fair ope-
ration, if We acquire the continent to the
Isthmus of Darien, work with such power
full force and effect that no man would ever
see another slave Territory on this conti-
nent."
The Washington Union, in the article
copying this extract, expresses its gratifca-
ton that General Shields is. in the canvass
in his State. giving powerful aid to his
distinguished colleague. Judge Douglas,
and remarks, that in this particular. speech
she sustained the principles of the Nebras-
ka bill with great force and effect" He
has given powerful aid to Judge Douglas.
And what was Judge Douglas doing! l
have no copies of the speeches he was
making in Illinois; but have an extract
of letter he addressed to the editor of the
Concord On. H.) Patriot. dated February
16, 1854,in which, speaking of the allega-
ton In the North that the Nebraska bill
opens the whole country to slavery, he
asks:
why do they not state the matter truly,
and state that 1T opens the country to
freedom, by leaving the people perfectly
free to do as they please %
This is very similar to sentiments ex-
pressed by the same distinguished gentle
man IN the Senate. in his speech on the
Territorial question, on the 18th and 18th
March, 1856. He said:
Last year 1 introduced a bill for the
admission of all the country acquired from
Mexico by the treaty of peace into the
Union as one State, reserving the right to
form new States out of any portion OF SAID
territory lying east of the Sierra Nevada
mountaius'' eff any bill of
last session had become the law of the land
which it certainly would have done if he
(Mr. Hale) had not united his forces with
those of the Senator from South Carolina
(Mr. Calhoun) to defeat 1.-THE whole OF
the territory acquired from Mexico would,
at this moment, have been dedicated to
freedom forever, BY constitutional provi-
sion.
IConolusion nert Wessl
S1EIeHryc IN ApRIL-The Greenbrier
Era says there was fine sleighing at Nicho-
las Courthouse, Va, on the 24th ult.. snow