The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-04-01

stay in it. Theirs would be a stampede os that
class of citizens lie regarded this as a victory
entirely without fruit, and as such he cared lit
tie or nothing sbJut it ; he should vote for the
bill as a matter of principle, bat thought the
South would gair nothing by it. g rs
Mr.. Houston Sid be should vote for the bin
in accordance With the views of the Legislature
of Texas.
Mr.. Pugh said ne should be reluctantly com.
PEELED to cast hisSs against the bill, in ODE.
dience to instruct. ons.
nounced-yeas 81, nays 25-as follows:
Kas-Messrs. Allen, Bayard, Benjamin,
Biggs, Bigler, Bright, Brown, Clay, Evens 5,
Fitch, Fitzpatrics Green, Gwin, Hammond,
Henderson, Houk IN, Hunter, Iverson Johuson
OF Arkansas. Jos uson of Tennessee, Jopes,
Kennedy, MAllor Mason, Pearce, Polk, Sc.
bsstian, Slidell, T pmpson of Kentucky, Them.
son OF New Jera Toombs, Wright, and Yu-
Nays-Messrs. Bell, Broderick, Chandler,
Clark, Collamer, Crittenden, Dixon, Doolstle,
Douglas, Durkee5 Fessenden, Foot, Eos .er,
Hale, Hamlin, srlan, King, Pugb, Sew, I'd,
simmons, Stuart, Sumner, Trumbull, W, de,
and Wilson-25.
Absent or Not soting-Messrs. Bates, G m.
eron, Davis, and t,eid-4
There was mked demonstration of ip-
plause in the g leries at the result of he
vote, which wass promptly checked by he
Chair.
| HOUSE
The House went in the Committee of he
Whole, Mr.. Bocosk, of Virginia, in the cha r,)
and resumed, noninally, the consideration of
the deficiency bill.
Mr.. Kellogg, of illinois, concluded his spe, ch
In opposition to the Lecompton Constituti IN.
Il A ma linz onfo -. -
| sistent with the Constitution and theory of ur
Government and opposed to the will of the So
pie. He recounted the various frauds per ,e.
trated against the Free State men of Kens IS,
| and maintained that the men of the North q nd
| South would stand upon perfect equality in oe
Territories, though Slavery should be excluded
| He wanted the Territories set apart for ne
laboring millions Of the whole country, No,sh,
| South, East, and West, who were in need of
homes and new e Ids to till. He depreca ed
the cry of dissoluti IN of the Union, but had no
fear that it would ever be dissolved. $s
Mr.. Singleton, O.. Mississippi, favored the d.
mission OF Kansas. as carrying out of the d &C.
trlne OF noninterv. ntion, and defended the n
stitution of Sla;ery. The anti Lecomp IN
Democrats were snly creating division in
favor of the main Hody of the Abolition arr ",
which was ENGAGE in sapping and mining be
| institutions of the South. Slavery agitat on
had disturbed the tranquility ard threatei ed
the stability of the Union for the last twer ;y-
Eve years. The ,uth had accepted cong o
mise after comprol Use, and had fully redeem ed
all her pledges; ut the fanaticism of be
North rode over - broke down all comp o.
misses and pledges.f
Mr.. Howard, Of Michigan, contended d at
Kansas was not properly before Congress AK
| ing for admission into the Union, and that ne
/ I,ac0Da ntop Conctif otiop did mt p,hodu INC
fairly-expressed, Unbiased will of the peoI e.
1t was not, therefore, a republican Constku-
tion in the true sep-e of the term, and they hpd
no power or right =, admit Kansas under it.
Mr.. Burnett, of kentucky, said the people
| OF the South had sver acquiesced in the Mis-
souri, compromise a. constitutional principe;
but they had cheer acquiesced in the KIN
sss-Nebraska bill, !. hich they hailed as ne
establishment of a New and just principle. I ae
| Supreme Court had. decided that the people of
| the Territories couH not exclude Slavery ur il
they came to form stttate Constitutions, and .ie
had hoped that all arties would acquiesce N
| this just decision ;but the Republicans b d
| not only derided ane hooted at it, but had ev IN
sssailed the purity q the motives of the me y
bers of the court. The Senator from N W
York Mr.. Seward chad accused the court of
| entering into a corrupt and dishonorable col o.
| sion. He regretted 20 find that Senator fir, m
his own State Mr.. Erittenden had Joined lac
| Republicans in this assault, and would say to
him that he awaited-the rebuke of his cons It.
, uents.
Mr.. Blair, of MiSsouri, said the system of
Slavery, which had controlled all branches. of
| this Government for years, was one which lac
| public safety required should be brought TITO
subsection. There Sas grand conspiracy to
extend the institute :, of Slavery, in support of
| wh al he IF tha or1t b.d
been brought to beef. This was disclosed ~
the language of thetPresident, who stated Il at
Kansas was slresdy1a State, and slave ST te
as much as Georgif and South Carolina. If
the Constitution of tie United States had me- lie
Kansas slave SITS q would it not also ca, ~
Slavery into every ate in the Union2 If tie
people of Kansas CO lid not constitutionally <.
clude shareholders with their property, neitf or
could the people of any State. This was We
ground recently tai an BY the Union, the A d.
ministration organ ia this city.
Mr.. j. G. Jones, ,Sf Pennsylvania, said 10
knew of no paper in this city which was recc g
missed as the organ o; the Administration.
Mr.. Blair said the gentleman was then ign o.
rant of what was anown to everybody ell g..
he thought the el~;tioa of the editor of tie
Union, by strict r rty vote, to be printer Of
the Senate, showed Sat his paper was reccy
missed. He went o5s,o argue that the Demo
cratic party was airing ultimately to establi III
the doctrine that the Constitution carries 8 j.
very everywhere in the Union. The Lecom j.
| ton affair wss only a step in that directic D..
That the Lecompton Convention could 1T
have held its sessions in Kansas but for t 10
protection of the Amy, proved that it cou d
not represent the peoples will. The scher re
was to drive free mel out of Kansas, to ma q
room for slaves. 81 was in favor Of giving 20
the people the lands which belonged to ther !;
in that sense he wsleen sgrarian. He quot d
from speeches of Southern statesmen, to shl W
the degraded condition Of the poor whites n
those parts of the S,uth where the land is b.
sorbed in large esta' ,s and cultivated By slav s.
Was it Democratic soctrine to prefer slaves o
citizens of the Rep bhcP The Southern IL
garchy claimed Constitutional right to ca, y
their property in the labor of their slaves il %
the Territories he claimed that the white D.
boring man had constitutional right of pre- D.
erty in his own labor, and that if he was exc a.
ded from Territory by Slavery, his prope, y
was deprecated. Slave owners had no me e
!; right to educate their slaves to be mechani Is
than to be lawyers ,,nd physicians. The s. ).
very question was nt one of North and Sous
but between the Pr ivileged classes and e
|, great masses of the people, The free VIII e
men of the South yesre more interested in &
, GLIDING Slavery from the Territories than ar =
body else, for that sns their only hope to e.
cape from degradatit D. he believed this CO j.
!, test would result emancipation in mary
slsveholding States4 and gloried in the no, 3
that his own State w5nld lead the column. 4
Mr.. Wortendyke, Of New Jersey, thong I
Che country was heartily disgusted with Slave ?
, agitation, and would be glad to have the Ks +
sas hobby thrown out of Congress at as ear y