The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-03-18

In the Washington Union Of Friday.
Feb. &c, We find the following condensed
account d the debate, on the presentation,
by Mr.. CErrENDEs, Of the Credentials Of
Gen. SHIELDS, as senator from this
State:
Mr.. johnson, OF Arkansas, moved that the
Senate resume the consideration Of the bill
to increase the military establishment Of the
United States.
Mr.. Crittenden rose 10 what he deemed
question Of privilege. lie had received
letter from his friend, Gen. Shields, who
claimed in that letter right to seat in
the United States Senate, and had fit it
his duty to his constituents az well as TO
himself TO press that claim upon the attet-
ton Of the Senate = and inasmuch as the
letter contained brief aud very pcrspcuoas
exposition OF the claim, and the reasons up
on which il rested, Mr.. q. asked that il
might be read.
The letter was accordingly read. Zen.
Shields argues that Minnesota Is now one Of
the sovereign States Of this Union, for there
can be no such anomaly a. State out Of
the Union, and refers to various preceien,s
in support of the claim that the oath be ad
ministered TO him, and that he be admitted
TO q seat.
Mr.. johnson, Of Arkansas, contended
that this was not question Of privilege,
aud, therefore, that it did not supersede his
motion TO proceed to the consideration Of
the army bill.
Mr.. Crttenden presented the credentials
of Gen. Shields which was read.
The Chair stated that having heard the
letter and credentials read, he would put the
question to the Senate whether they would
take up the question ~ u question OF priv
/ lege or not.
Mr.. Hunter thought the question might
well be raised with regard % the right Of
the Senators from Minnesota to be admitted
tel TO seats; but he did not regard it as II
question Of privilege. He believed that in
| the casts Of Michigan and Tennessee men,
bcrs were admitted by courtesy in advance
but not as question OF privilege.
Mr.. Pugh expressed the opinion that this
was question OF privilege 1t was true, rs
stated 10 the letter which had been read, that
the first enabling act ir the case OF Ohio
was the act Of admission in fact, there new
er was any other After constitution had
been formed when the agents Of the State
presented the constitution to the Senate 1t
was referred 10 select committee to con-
slider what further steps If any, were neces-
sary in order for the admission Of the state
into the Union. After consideration, the
committee reported to the Senate that moth
ing more was necessary to complete her al
mission, except TO establish United States
district court in Ohio, and nothing more was
done than to pass an act establishing that
district court No other enabling act was
ever passed When the first enabling act
was passed, il was justified upon the ground
that il was conditional act Of admission
and when the State to be formed complied
with the conditions. she was in the Union
without anything further. That was the he
ginning OF all enabling acts, For that rea
son he did not think il necessary Tor Kan
AS or any other State to have any enabling
act but, ut the same time. be did not think
that Minnesota had complied with the terms
of the enabling act which had been passed,
for he did not think she had ever held a
convention under the terms Of the law; but
he did not regard these IA fatal, for Congress
could heal them by joint resolution, or sub
seauent act in relation to the matter, When
gentleman presented himself here, claim
ing to he received as the representative OF q
State, he regarded that "a a question o
privilege but in the present case he did moi
think that Minnesota had so far compiled
with the terms of her admission a. 10 entitl,
her Senators to be sworn in without som'
further action by Congress.
Mr.. Mason concurrei with the views o
his colleague, and asked ii an applicant fol
seat was Senator before he took tn
oath
Mr.. Cri.,enden replied that although 4
might be exceedingly proper, and was re
uuired by law. that an oath should be taken
vet that ceremony constituted no part Of hi
senatorial powers. Il he should act withou
taking the oath. would not his acts he valid
II "a Judge goes upon the bench withou
swearing under his commission and then il
the performance ot his judicial function
sentence criminal to death. il not that &C
ton valid Was not the senator from
Virginia senator before he took the oath
and il not. could the administration OF IN
oath make him Senator Certainly not
If a Senator comes here with his creiential
in his hand, and the Senate refuses TO admin
ister the oath of ofhcc to him, that was
iiagran, breach Of privilege. lie went %
to argue tina, this was not new question
and declared that he considered Genera
Shcldss right to scat a. good a. bis own
Mr.. johnson, of Arkansas, hoped IN
senator from Kentucky would WITHDRAW
his proposition, for i was evident that
mus, consume good deal Of time, and
was very important that the army bill sboul
he disposed OF.
Mr.. Hunter proposed tina, the matte
should he referred to the Committee ON th
Judiciary for consideration,
Mr.. johnson Of Arkansas felt bound :
move TO lay the whole subject on the tabl'
The motion was not agrsi ,o--ycas ..
nays 26-as follows;
~ Na..r. Allan RcyS u,iyhs Rrowt