The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-01-03

cIulIIy pup
ery Of Missssppians virginians, and Tennesseans II
you ask protection for your property through congress
sional legislation through territorial legislation,
property we say we are equally entitled protection for
We say that neither Congress the territorial
legislature SHALL with consent make any insulting DIS
elimination between the people and property Of one section
Of the Union and the people and property Of other sec
honbetween the property Of citizen OF New Hampshire
or Massachusetts, and the property OF citizen OF
Mississippi Can maintain ourselves the sound
Of this position And il not why
Do gentlemen claim that under the ban Of the
constitution Do gentlemen pretend that the constitution
which gives authority to be here which authorizes
to address this august body to-day which brings US into
this council house. discrminaes against the property OF
the fifteen southern States of this Unon2 Do they pretend
that there anything in that constitution which denies TO
property equal protection in the Territories with the
property Of the other sixteen States of the Unon2 UNI
derake say that it Is the only article Of property which
is clearly and distinctly recognised by the constitution.
Take anything else merchandise livestock anything you
please and you find nothing in the constitution which
specially and specifically looks TO its recognition prop
ey The constitution does recognise persons held to ser
vice ayes property and it recognises nothing else by
Every other kind of property is left to the proec
ton of local State legislation Not word found in
the constitution about merchandise livestock money
property Persons bound to service sayes alone
mentioned Then, with what pretence of justice is said
that this property is under the ban of the constitution
that it equally entitled to protection with any other
kind Of property?
The southern States Mr. President have been accused
of violence in the maintenance of their rights under the
constitution they understand them Our people set
down awess and constantly charged with attempts
carry their points by force stranger would be very
apt to conclude from the accounts given of that every
southern walking citadel. / shall make no
defence against charges like this-our States and
pie stand the defensive. Never sir, never since the
government was founded has the North had to
complain that either the southern States the southern
people have nteered with their domestic concerns have
reproaches utter but our northern friends say
much Can they say that they have never nerfered
with domestic affairs
When the Kansas bill passed. hoped there would
be end ohis controversy It was intended to take the
question of slavery of Congress- and transfer it to the
people of the Territory where properly belonged and
who, all agreed had the right al the proper time to
settle it for themselves What the proper time may be
subject left open for discussion and to this point
will recur presently.
1t certainly contemplated by any of that vio
ence was to be used by any party to coerce decision in
Kansas The people there, those who bona de cit
of the Territory to be left perfectly free to settle
their domestic affairs in their way subject TO but
influence and that the benign and peaceful influence OF
the constitution No sooner had this bill passed than
concerted and powerful effort was set on foot here and
rapidly taken up in the New England States to COLOMBO
the Territory with vagrant population Men were en-
workshops and carry on the mechanic ars-no not for
these purposes They went not with the artisans tools
the implements of husbandry in their hands, but with
ect could not be mistaken. Instead of coonzipg the
country and making for themselves benefcent and whole
laws-laws under which they meant themselves to
vepeope went to Kansas for higher purpose than to
fan the flames Of discord and to make laws from which
they meant themselves to fee They went for mischief
and they got they sowed the whirwnd and reaped the
storm. They sent Kansas to make Kansas free
State nons uolenS and the Missourians named to
madness by their conduct 1t not sir that these men
went the States from which they went that stirred the
blood of Mssourians but it the purpose for which
they went When the Kansas bill passed very few of
expected Kansas to become slave State and few Of
cared much whether it did net But when we saw
attempt made by the enemies of slavery to plant the
borders Of slave State reesoil colony with higher
purpose than to harass that State-when saw at
do
tiers in Kansas by forcing them not Kansas but
New England governmentour people rose niasse and
swore by the God that made Them these things should not
be. 3 H.r
The senator from New Hampshire Mr. HALE the other
day paraded before the Senate handbi and he did it
with flourish trumpets would have done honor
the fat knight when he claimed the credit of killing Hot
spur The handful spoke of Buchanan and Breckenridge
and free Kansas The senator evidently thought he had
prove of that handful 1t probably suggested
GUS idea to many who saw it. may have suggested that
the democratic party was for Kansas free as the senator
from New Hampshire understood the word ree and If
it did it suggested falsehood The democratic party as
party neither for free Kansas slave Kansas as the
freesoilers understand the words ree and save" The
democratic party for leaving Kansas perfectly free at the
right time settle the slavery question for herself restrain
ed only all in our action by the provisions OF
the federal constitution In this the democrats
for Kansas. The senator's idea, if understand him,
is to make Kansas free by releasing the black from the
authority Of his MASTER and then force government on
the white people in the Territory through the agency of
the negro free by enslaving the white but my free
Kansas makes the white Free and leaves the negro
where the constitution left himsubec to the authority
of his master.
was somewhat surprised Mr. President the other day.
hear the senator from Illinois, Mr. TRUMBuLL in cate
chsng the senator from Pennsylvania Mr. BIGLER who
was then addressing the Senate raise the question to
how far the democratic side of the house concurred
in opinion upon the mooed point of squaer sovereignty
suppose the object of the senator in introducing that point
to make mischefto stir up strife between senators
this side of the chamber If that was his purpose let
say him that he fell he will continue to fall very
far short of his mark That there may be shades Of differ
in opinions is very likely that do not every
point with my distinguished and venerable friend
from Michigan probable but that there Ia any difference
between ua which can by possibility prevent acting in
harmony for the accomplishment of certain great purposes
which the national democracy have in view utterly deny
should prefer to have friend agree with as he may
prefer have agree with him. but difference is not
SUCH shall presently show, that we may not without
sacrifice either side act together practical issues
But sir how comes 1t that the senator from Illinois, how
comes il that other senators on his side have all of sud-
den found something monstrous in this doctrine Of
squatter sovereignty When had the first evidence
hbted of the power of squater sovereignty on this
continent? Excuse me- sir but undertake to say That
the frat exhibition of it in the SAFE which you have
the honor solely at this moment to represent the floor
of the Senate Mr. WELLER in the cbar) When the peo
pie of California assembled in convention, and undertook
to frame State constitution for themselves they were all
squatters they in the country without authority OF
law; there was no law authorizing them to be there
When they assembled in convention on the high mission
of making State constitution they assembled there to
perform act of sovereignty when they made the cons
tuition and up State government in all its forms II
act Of sovereignty performed by squatter and oy
nobody else. t# lH5