Saint Paul weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1858-1859, 1858-05-22

the objection formerly stated would ST.
exist if there had been no enabling aC
for Minnesota, and thus were case Tx
that Of Tennessee. In that case, withou
any authority whatever, either express G
implied, from Congress, the people {
Tennessee formed q State cODstitutio
and elected a Legislature, which chos
Senator's to this body, and sent them her
in the year 1876, to take their seats on thi
iioor. They appeared and claimed thei
seats and even before Tennessee was ad
mittted as State the committee reports
that they might be admitted to the floor @
the Senate as spectators. Subsequently, o.
the morning of the last day of the session
the State was admitted. Their credential
were then presented under an election bel,
previous to the admission of the State an,
on their presentation the Senate decided tina
those gentlemen were not entitled to seats
and they were afterwards reelected by tn,
Legislature of Tennessee, and took their seat
at the next session of Congress. That wa
In 179C, the first case that occurred after til,
formation of the Government Perhaps
that practice had been extcn led generally a.
the rule, it would have been more in confor
nifty with rigid construction of the claus,
of the Constitution as to the mode of elect
ing Senators; but to my mind there is clear
distinction between that case and the case
OF Minnesota. In the case of Minnesota We
did authorize the formation of State gov
ernment; and we provided that it should be
an lnchoate State, not State of the Union
from the time of the adoption of the consti-
tuition. The constitution was adopted an
election was held under it; Legislature was
chosen; and they have sent Senators here
| think that our subsequent ratification by
the admission of the State may, without any
violence to legal principles be considered as
retroactive, and as giving validity to the
election, although the State was not State
OF the Union at the time it took place.
Mr.. HARLAN. Mr.. President, for the
first time since have been a member of the
Senate, L allude to personal remarks applied
to me by Senators on this floor. Once or
twice previously, in the dischsrge of their du-
ties, Senators here have supposed it to be
necessary to pursue similar course. 1 did
not then respond, for this consideration
when such remarks proceed from weak men
they arc unworthy of response and they are
never resortcd to by strong men without a
pressing necessity, unless driven to the wall.
Now, sir, when the honorable Senator from
Georgia Mr.. TooMBsl attributes what have
done here to mistaken notions of what true
knowledge of gentility would require, he is
welcome to his opinion. suppose that on
these subjects, rren carry within their own
bosoms the standard by which they measure
others. protest against the supposition Oh
the part Of any member Of this body tn It
there exists in my mind the least coloring of
personal feeling or acrimony against the Sen
ator elect from the new State of Minnesota.
As before remarked, have done what 1
have from a sense of duty as the representa-
tive of the people of Iowa; and if Senators
here choose to meet me by the application of
personal remarks derogatory to my charac-
ter as gentleman, give them notice now,
once for all, that such replies are, in my judg-
ment. unworthy the Senate, and will never
hereafter be noticed by ME. | am rot here
to defend my integrity or character as a ma,.
or as gentleman. I am here on my re-
sponsibility as representative ola Sovereign
State, and shall never stoop to engage in per-
sonal wrangles. l make no personal alll-
sions to others which do not believe to be
proper in the legitimate discharge of my du-
ties as such representative. And when Sen
atorS suppose that other motives influence
me, they err greatly.
The Senator from Louisiana chose to rep
resent what | had done as cruel, and stated
that in the printed report before the Senate
the party was eXonerated from any blame
whatever. Well, sir, the Allegations con-
tanned in that printed report are confronted
by the sworn statement of citizens of my
State and it is sworn statements of theirs
with the oral statement of their agent. to
which l have alluded, that I have presented
to the Senate. If the Senate do not deem
these facts. if true, worthy of their conside-
ration, SO be it, Then | shall have discharg.
ed my duty as the representative Of my con
stituents and Of my State. l bring them to
the notice of the Senate. | leave it for more
experienced members of this body to decide
for themselves the proper course to be pur-
sued. 1t may be that have erred in judy
mcnt, and on that subject will not confront
HIM with the opinion of the late member from
South Carolina, the chairman of the Com
mittee on the judiciary, whose opinion be-
fore stated.
Mr. PUGH. I should like to ask the Sem
ator from Iowa when the late Senator from
South Carolina ever expressed the opinion
that, upon the question OF swearing in a
Senator elect, we were to go int allegations
against the personal character? It is con-
trary to what l have understood to be his
opinions in such cases.
Mr.. HARLAN. Since have been q men,
Der of this body, there have been three con
tested cases as to the rights cf Senators to
seats on this floor Ore was my own ano.
Their was that of the honorable Senator from.
Illinois; and the third that Of the honorable
Senators from Indiana. l will rot now I'M
dcriake to say in which one Of these cases
this opinion was given; but know there are
Senators around me who remember that this
opinion was expressed by the late chairman
of the Committee on the Judiciary, aud ! re.
member full well that the Senator from Ohio
on that occasion, called in question the cor
rectncss Of tlcs opinion. Knowing this, in
duced the statement which made on the
presentation of these papers; that these learn
cd in constitutional law had expressed the
opinion that, in eases Of this kind objection
ought To be made when the party presented
his credentials, but that there wore Others
whose opinions were entitled TO respect, who
UElcTcu tiilu AcIiCc NY QOuDb do " Tue pro-
per time to introduce this matter.
As l stated before, have 10 motion to
make; leave it with the Senate. IL they
suppose that this is the proper time % ordel
a committee of investigate, if indeed the,
Shalt order Gre, SO be it. 1t is for the Sen
a:", not for me, to decide.
Mr.. PUGH. should not say word i
it were not that the Senator from Iowa haC
repeated his assertion. | now rocolcct per
fectly the case to which he alludes. In tho
discussion in this body upon. the right Of tn,
honorable Senator from Illinois MR. TRUM
BELL to his scat, l put the question to my
honorable friend, the late Senator from Soutl
Carolina, (Mr. Butler) what he would do il
case negro were elected to the Senate
of the United States, there being no prohibi
ton in the Constitution OF the United States
against it? He said he would move to cx
pei him; but never understood from him
on that or the many other contested cases il