M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1856-04-24
from the Washington UniOn,l
Another RcbuIxe Of Black Repub-
licanism---The Spurious Mem
Orial again Brought Forward
and again Rejected.

Orial again Brought Forward
and again Rejected.
The entire session of the Senate or
Yesterday was consumed by a most
animated and interesting debate, which
involved the reception OF paper that
was presented as the original of the
spurious copy which was thrown ouI
Of the Senate on Thursday last by
only three dissenting votes. Mr.,
Harlan offered a petition from Col,
onel S. II. Lane, which purporteI to
make exhibits OF the original memoir,
al and ofthe copy before rejected, ask,
ing the Senate on these to grant the
prayer of the petitioners, and append
ing there to an affidavit of his own in
explanation of the circumstances un-
der which the copy was made and pre-.
sented to the Senate. Mr.Harlan &C.
companied his motion which a long
harangue, which sounded very much
like a funeral oration, i'll which he de,
tailed in very eulogistic terms Colonel
Lanes private and public services,
political, partisan, and military, Civ
ing him quite as much credit for his
eminent exploits as Democrtic parti-
san as for achievements as an officer
in the Mexican war. The apology
for this biographical sketch was, that
in the proceedings of the Senate on
Thursday last insinuations and i'm.
putations were made as to the spuri.
GUS character of the memorial that Col.
Lane had procured Gen. Cass to pre-
sent, which reflected injuriouSly upon
his reputation. Mr.. Harlan seemed
to suppose that man who had here
toforc been so good Democrat, and
so chivalrous a soldier, could not be
guilty of attempting to smuggle into
the Senate a forged paper. He thought
the explanation of Col. Lane, veri-
fed by lis affidavit,was entirely salts
factory, and asked that the petition be
received and referred to the Commit
tee on Territories.
lie was interrupted and rebuked
very pointedly in the course Of his
remarks by Messrs. Pugh, Toucey
and Cass, to all of whom he attributed
remarks in regard to Col. Lane which
they had not made. His apology for
the Misrepresentation was that Mr..
Butler had asked in the debate on
Thursday who Col. Lane was, and
that, as neither Mr.. Pugh nor Mr..
Toucey nor General Cass made any
to Mr.. Butler, he inferred
from their silence that they endorsed
the imputations Of others on Colonel
Lanes conduct. Mr.Butler requested
Mr.. Harlan, in very pointed language
not to undertake to state his position
on an issue which he could not under.
stand, and then explained that his
question had reference entirely to the
official character in which Col. Lane
came forward to thrust into the Sen
ate a spurious memorial.
Mr.. Douglas followed in one Of the
efforts ofhis senatorial career.
He said it was much to Col. Lanes
credit that he has been brave officer
in Mexico: that he had been demo-
crat and had voted for the Nebraska
bill but all this did not prove that
the memorial he brought forward was
not spurious. lfhe had fallen from
grace and apostatized from the Dem
ocracy, he had only done what Blair
and Donelson had done, and he did
not suppose that the fact that they
were once democrats was any reason
why their present conduct should
not be criticised and condemned.
Mr.. Douglas took up the original
and compared it with what purported
to be a copy-the same that was re-
jected on Thursday. lie showed thai
three pages placed the action of the
pretended Topeka legislature on the
distinct ground that Congress had nc
power to give a territorial government
to Kansas that the organic law pas
sed by Congress was o nullity, and
that the proceedings Of the Topeka
party were confessedly revolutionary.
He showed that this was one of the
main points of dispute between him
and Mr.. Collamer in their reports, and
he charged that the original memori-
al had been altered, and those three
pages suppressed because they sus.
tained his side of the dispute, and
condemned that of Mr.. Collamer.-
The copy, on the contrary, admitted
the power of Congress to pass the or.
ganic law, and represented the mem.
Orialists as humble suppliants for the
interposition of Congress to relieve
them from oppression. He asked
with emphasis, if it did not look like
forgery to suppress so vital a portion
of the original document and then
present as a copy q paper which con
veyed wholly different view Of the
question.
Mr.. Douglas then pointed to the
fact that the original had no sigma
lures, no date, and no attestation, ex