The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1858-03-05
CON CIR ESSI0NAL. .
THIRTY-FIFTH CONGREss--First Session.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1855.
ADMISSION OF KANSAS.

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1858.
ADMISSION OF KANSAS.
Mr.. Seward made an elaborate and carefully mr..
pared speech in opposition to the admission of an
sas under the Lecompton Constitution. He com
menced by saying that eight years ago we slew the
Wlmot proviso and buried it under the floor of the
Senate chamber. Four years ago we exploded al
together the time-honored system of governing the
Territories of the United States by federal rules and
regulations and substituted in its place the new
gospel of popular sovereignty all whose ways were
to be ways of wisdom, and all whose paths were
| supposed to be the towery paths of peace. Never
theess the question of slavery or no slavery in the
Territories of the United States is again stirring
! the masses of to-day. The mangled proviso has
burst the cerements of the grave, and is striking
hands here in our very presence with the gentle
spirit OF popular sovereignty mad, and scatter
! ing dlsmay and CONSERVATION throughout the ad-
ministration benches in both chambers of Congress
| MIR. 5. proceeded to contrast the present stua-
| ton OF the country in respect to freedom and sla
yery with its situation in the early days of its his
| tory. AT first there twelve slave States and
only one free State; now, there fifteen slave
States and sixteen free States. At first the action
OF the federal government was generally in favor of
free labor and free States; now it is generally in
favor of slave labor and slave States. Among the
more prominent acts in favor of freedom was the
prohibition of the African slave trade; while on the
other hand, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise
was direct intervention in favor of slavery But
strange to say, after the government had been in
ervening with the question of slavery freedom in
the Territories of the United States for more than
sixty years. the remarkable discovery made that
Congress had right to intervene at ALL but that
perfect freedom" incaded the freedom to establish
slavery.
This was not a new doctrine when it was announ-
ced in the Nebraska BILL but had been vagrant for
several years, seeking the adoption of some poli
cal party, under the of ''squatter sovereign
ty; but now it was brought to the baptsmal font,
and received the more euphonious name Of ''popu-
lar sovereignty" The people had heretofore
Joyed all the liberty which free people could de-
SIRE but their Representatives in Congress were Sc
duced to taste of the fruit of the of knowledge
OF good and evil, and the result the knowledge
OF evil rather than good Mr.. 5. also alluded to
the interference of Mssourians with the election in
Kansas, and commented on the Dred Scott decision
as well as various other matters which have hereto
fore been discussed in connexion with the Kansas
question.
Mr.. Thomson, of New Jersey. alluded to the con
troversies that had constantly existed hitherto in
reference to the condition of things in Kansas and
said that now there was favorable opportunity to
put an end to them by her admission as State in
to the Union. He contended that the Lecompton
constitution was an expression of the will of the
people of Kansas, having been framed bv conven-
hon OF delegates duly elected for that purpose and
replied to many of the arguments which had been
made against that instrument. He referred to
the cases OF fourteen different States whose cOnsti
tutions were adopted without having been submit
ted to the people, and claimed that if any wrong
/
ton constitution that wrong has been in consequence
OF misconduct their part and therefore they had
no right to complain. If the free State party have
a large majority they pretend it will be easv for
them to change any obnoxious feature in the con-
stltuton; and if, the other hand they are in the
minority, it is their duty to submit, like good ct
zens to the will of the majority. Upon the conclu
sion of his remarks,
Mr.. Hammond obtained the floor; and after an ex-
| ecutive session.
The Senate adjourned
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
The House resumed the consideration of Senate
resolution to extend and define the authority of the
President under the ctapprOved January 16 1857.
entitled AN act to amend an act entitled An act
10 promote the efficiency of the in respect to
the dropped and retired naval officers" the aues-
ton being on the motion that the be consider
ed by which the resolution referred to the Com
mlttee of the Whole the State Union
Mr. Whitley, of Delaware, said the resolution
asked that the President, after inspecting the re
cords OF the naval retiring board and the courts of
inquiry, should say, not the Executive, but as the
judicial officer revising the action of these courts
whether or not these men-some forty of them
should be renominated to the Senate for their old
rank and position in the navy 1t was an act of
justice which should not be DELAYED. The members
OF the naval retiring board were honorable men, but
they were human beings; and, in his Judgment. it
was significant fact that they were directly inter
ested IN their own decisions. The courts had given
themselves great latitude. In one case they abso-
lutely inquired the relations existing between an
oihcer and his wife-they wanted to invade the Sc
crecy OF the bed-chamber to see whether this man
ana MS wlie had ever quarreled. Was not that too
oao IN TINS enlightened country? In some of the
courts, when testimony was attempted to be given
On the part OF the U. States and the counsel of the
ohcers objected to it, the objection was overruled be
lore they had heard what it was. Would they deny
these people, who had been tried so illegally the
poor justice OF letting the President under the con-
stltuton and laws of the country supervise the re
cords OF these courts, and in those cases where he
saw that injustice had been DONE ask the Senate to re-
nstate them? These officers were what they needed
LOT the service of the country, and although they
did frolic, if when the hour of danger came they
knew their duty and dared to do it, why not keep
them IN the service, and they would have such
reputation IN the event of another war as their
navy acquired in 1872
Mr.. Bocock of Virginia, opposed the resolution
on the ground that the cases of the retired officers
NAG peen equtably decided upon by the naval courts
ana the effect of the resolution would be to refer
the remaining cases to the President for his decis
ION. The retired officers had not been dsgraced by
these proceedings, but in many casses were treated
WIN mercy and consideration. The great question
ought to be, had the thing done good or harm?
HAD 1t improved the naval service or had it injured
1t! who had come to the House and declared it
had done harm? Secretary Dobbin had not done
it on the contrary, he held that it was great re-
form, and had effected unspeakable good for the
service.
Mr.. Clingman, of North Carolina agreed with
the gentleman from Virginia that some such meas
ure was necessary. He voted for the original law
and had no doubt that it was a good one but the
manner in which it was carried out was highly OBJ
jectionable. He had also voted for the act of the
last Congress to revise the decisions of that board
The gentleman from Maryland Mr.. Davis had
said that the courts of inquiry had confirmed the
wisdom and justice OF the decision of the retiring
board. He had looked into the matter. and found
that there were one hundred and eipht cases of
appeal, IN slxty-two of which their decisions had
been reversed. The resolution limited the action
pl Ihe resident 10 forty-sx persons, whose cases
examined He bad oh;
the only real objection that it imposed larg,
amount Of labor on the President
Mr.. Wlnslow, of North Carolina reviewed the
teglsiaIon OF congress ON the subject of naval re-
form, ana advocated the passage of the resolution
lie was determined never to give the power to any
board to make final action, unless that action was
approved by the Commander-in- Chief
Mr. Seward of Georgia, condemned the action oF
the courts of inquiry saying that in order TO carr
out the law under the instructions of the Attorney
General 1t was necessary that these officers shouId
open the trial themselves, thus appearing at a dis
advantage. The original law had been nassad
through the House under the operation of the pre
vious question, and from that day to this there had
been struggle, not only between the officers of the
navy, out IN every department of the government
10 correct the INJURY, and the resolution passed
1t would be the crownng act
me previous question havn gbeen called
Mr.. Jones, of Tennessee moved that the motion
TO reconsider be laid on the table
Mr.. Millson, of Virginia appealed to the gentle
man to withdraw his motion as the preyious ouas
ton had been called.
Mr.. Jones did So
MI Mr. Letcher, OF Virginia renewed it.
Inc question was taken, and the motion to recon
slder was not laid on the table-yeas 27, nays l27.
Inc previous question was then seconded and the
question taken on the motion to reconsider the vote
by which the resolution was referred to the Com
nttee of the Whole on the state of the Union-and
it was agreed to.
The resolution was then read third time and
pasSed-yeas l22, nays 5l-as follows:
lEAs.-Messrs. Adrain, Ahl, Anderson Arnold
Avery, Billinghurst, Bonham, Bowie, Bufinton,
Burlingame, Burnett, Burns, Burroughs, Caskie,
Chaffee, Chapman, Clark of Connecticut, CLARK of
Missouri, Clawson, Clay, Clingman, Clark r, Cocb-
rane of New York, Cockeri Covode, Cox, Cragin,