New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-02-20
Mr.. BINGHAM, n. C., ON THE MINNESOTA
BILL.
To ne Exitev of The NJ y Tyibvse


SIR: Permit me through your journal TO cay some
thing in vindcation Of my vote upon the Minnesota
bill which vote you characterize in an article Of the Sd
inst as an act Of misbehavior. You assume that an
opportunity was given to offer amendments to this bill,
and censure myself and others for letting this opporu
n,y pass unm proved and then voting aesins. the bill
You are mstsken in your assumption There was no
opportunity given for amendment TO this bill. lmme
datey upon its Introduction, the previous question
was demanded and sustained thereby cutting of all
amendment and excluding all debate. There was no
course left but simply 20 vote for or against the bill as
reported by the Committee. / voted against the bill
because considered and believed it to be wrong i'll
principle and policy, and not because as you seem TO
a, sume that vas DESTROYS to reard or prevent the
formation snd admission OF a Free State The edmls
sion Of Free Stale, formed within the Territory OF
MnDesOti, is consuuina,ion which | sm as DESTROYS
to effect as you can be; but | doubt whether
il is likely TO be advanced by INCORPORATING
in the enabling Act las does this Minnesota
bill a provision which you implicitly admit to
be wrong. ou Fay that I" II would have been per-
fecuy proper while The bill was open to amendment
to have moved that the right TO vote IN the election
"of the Constitutional Convention should be confined
"to citizens OF the United States If 1t would have
been proper to have offered this amendment TO the bill,
1t would have been proper to have adopted II, aud 90
you admit for your say it would have prevailed with
out q show OF opposition" II this provision was
proper it not wrong TO report and pass the Mime
sofa bill without it, The House so concluded imme.
dlateiY alter he passage oil lDScftlog. Win
great unanmity, ia the Oregon bill this very provision
which was wanting in the Minnesota bill These two
bills originally reported by the Committee, author
zto persoDs who were not czcns of the United Sste
either native naturazed but ALIENS to vote for the
election of delegates 10 form State Constitutions and
Governments within those Territories. The House
struck this provision without show OF op-
posiIion from the Oregon bill, and inserted
therein the amendment which you say it would
have been "peIfectly proper" to have inserted in
the Minnesota bill. If 1t was right 70 strike
this provision from the Oregon bill it vas wrong
to retain il the Minnesota BILL and equally wrong to
enact any such provision into law. 1t seems TO me
that souno policy and principle demands that only citi
of the United States, naturalzed and nsve with
out distinction should be authorized by Congressional
enac meDf to form State Governments and Consutu-
tions within Territories The importance OF this
restriction and limitation you admit, and the evil re-
suit likely to flow from the neglect of the House 10 To-
sert 10 the Minnesota BILL you very clearly suggest
THE result stated by yourself is that the people of
Mnr. sofa may under the sanction of this BILL insert In
their State Constitution the provision that ALIENS ow-
ing allegiance TO foreign Governments may exercise the
right of suffrage in the proposed State of Mime.
sofa and serd representatives, here TO egslae over c
izers of the United States.
The uniform practice Of twenty seven States OF the
Union excluding ALIENS from the exercise OF suffrage
speaks in condemnation OF this new policy II Is
one thing to confer outrage upon aliens within Terri
tory by organic act for It's government rs Ter
rory and quite another thing 10 authorize aliens by
al enabling act 70 form State Government aud Con-
q mode Of petition through Territorial Assembly,
which petition. or Territorial act as Is called 1t is ex-
preesy declared Congress may allow or refuse at pleas
ure but by enabling act, as you state 10 your art
Gle Congress coners upon the people of the Territory
the abeolute right to form State Constitution, and
which right YOU say they must be allowed to exercise
for themselves subject to no Limitations or restrte'
lions, except those imposed by the enabling act. IL
does not follow because three or four new Ststes have
without any authority OF law, inaus urated this aen
pocy in their State organizations that the Represen
tsives in Congress ought 10 engraft that policy upon
enabling acts and thereby III advance give 10 II the
sanction of national law. You admit that this
ought not to have been done in this Minnesota bull and
that it would have been perfectly proper 10 have
"amended tia. bill as TO have restrained the State
" from extending the right of suffrage to any but c
" zebs OF the United States agree with you in that;
and because that restriction was not imposed voted
against that BILL The House justified this vote by 10
serting the amendment in the Oregon bi restricting
suffrage 10 citizens Of the United States nsturazed
and native. Ii is quite appsrent that this defect IN
the Minnesota bill had been known before the previous
question was cemsnded and ordered that bill would
have been iD like manner amended. The defect was
not apparent upon the face of that biu and could only
be asceftaned by a reference 10 the organic sct and
hence escaped the notice OF the majority of the House
until after their votes had been recorded in ts favor
and the bill bad passed. | doubt not that those vino
voted for this bill scuated by honest purposes and
patriotic motives.
As Republican. DESTROYS Of the speedy and COM
plete triumph Of all the principles set forth 10 the Re
pJ bhcaI platform and az a representative OF the pso-
pie. cannO. favor any legislation which is conceded
10 be wrong both ia principle and policy. freely &C
&C I'd to Others the privilege of acting up TO their
victons Of duty and demand the same right for myself
In the exercise Of this undoubed right voted for the
Oregon bill and ogoin,t the Minnesota bill. These
two bills wers in direct conflict in respect Of very i'm
por,aht provision aid could not, therefore, consist
JOHN 4 BINGHAM.