The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1858-01-19

hiS duty to the laws and the best interest ct
the country by pointedly rebuking the law
less act of Commodore Paulding. than by |
excusing it. 1t would not do for the Presi-
dent TO say that Commodore Paulding's act
was q violation of law, and then wink at it.
No matter if Nicaragua does not complain.
1t was not for us to violate our laws, even
though Nicaragua does not complain, and
execute them when she does complain
Our duty is to go according to law. If
Commodore Paulding has conformed to law,
let him be applauded. Ifnot, let him be
! condemned. He admired the spunk of the
Senator from Illinois (Mr Douglas) in bold
| ly expressing his views heretofore, although
he differed from every view uttered by that
Senator ON the Kansas question.
Mr. Houston, (opp,) of Texas, was anxious
to have the documents printed, because he
wanted information on the subject. When
the information was made public he would
express his views.
Mr. Seward, (opp,) of New York, referred
to the fact that the President had an
nounced in his message that the arrest of
Walker was without the authority of law,
but the question then came up whether the
officer who committed the act should be
censured or punished in any way for it
On that point the President makes an ex-
cuse for Paulding, which was that the par
1 ty who had been arrested had been !ndict-
ed in the United States for an offence
To- 10, foil tn 81 than
the high seas, the naval officer had arrested
them in the performance of the very act
they meditated. Here were two parties
who were delinquent. In the first place
there was a band of lawless men, who had
escaped the vigilance of the police and gone
abroad to levy war, in violation of the laws
a of the United States, with a nation with
whom we were at amity. On the other
! hand, there was an officer who, through ex-
cess of vigilance, had surpassed his instruc-
TONS. and had himself committed a viola
ton Of law. He thought the President had
balanced this case with exact Justice. The
/ President had censured the fugitives, and
while admitting the good intentions of that
officer had also censurcd Kim for violating
the law. What more could be asked y
Suppose punishment more or less severe
:, should be passed upon the officer, what shall
be done with the clIicf offender who has
been brought back? Nothing has been
dnno towards bringing him to a trial for the
effrnce for which he stands indicted and
the President has been dcfed to the teeth by
Walker in his late letter, in which he states
that no matter who may interfere at home
or abroad, he is determined to proceed in
the prosecution Of his design. If honora-
BILE Senators insisted upon it, he was quite
willing flat censurc should be passed upon
Paulding, but lie must ask them in Justice
to mete out some punishment for the great
CT criminal. Suppose the government
should punish Padding and leave the others
to go unpublished, what is the lesson that
will be learned from this affair? 1t is that
ynu may go out of the jurisdiction of the
United States and levy war against any ma
ton with whom we are at peace, provided
you can only escape the vigilance of the
police on land, and if you commence your
acts, although the State shall be grateful
FOR the protection they receive, still the of
ficcr who makes the arrest shall be punish
cd, and you shall be apprehended. To be
consistent they should go further, and pro-
, pose to restore Walker to the place from
which he taken. If it was right to in
wade Nicaragua, it equally right to in
wade New Granada or Brazil, or any other
South American State. Why should we
, punish the Pawnecs or Apaches for commit
ting dcprcdations upon our citizens, and
! claim that our people shall go abroad with
impunity and commit depredations upon
the people of other States! If gentlemen
S think the prize pie is right, let them intro
duce bill to repeal the neutrality laws.
. Mr. Davis, (adm,) of Miss.-To what
: principle does the Senator allude?
4, Mr. Scward-That the crime is altogethel
!, in the offender bring caught; but if he car
q escape from the United States and reacl
t the country against which the war is to b.
d made, the act is innocent and right.
Mr. Davis-Nubody on this side of the
: Chamber asserts such principle as that
S Mr. Seward called attention to what haG
: been said by his (Mr Davis) colleague (Ml
t Brown) that Gen. Walker had violated n.
a law; but the President, on the other hand
e thought that he had not only violated tn,
, law of the land but had also violated tn,
J. higher law. (Laughter.) Cd -r.f'f-.
f Mr. Davis replied that it was the sacre;
: privilege of an American citizen to bea
: arms, and whenever he choose to leave hi
q own country and risk his life and fortune il
r fighting for the oppressed elsewhere he hat
o a right to do SO. 1t was upon that principl,
+ the war of 1912 took place, and it was
:. principle dear to every American heart.
n Mr. Pugh, (dem,) of Ohio, was of opinion
v that the principles laid down in the messag
,: were neither warranted by the constitution
o nor by any principle of the law of nations
b The question was not whether Walker wa
9 committing a crime against Nicaragua
| Of bar b;,~, H. IL