The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-01-14

that the convention ut LecomptOn was regularly au-
thorzed convention. In examining the provisions Of
that declaration OF independence they would ind that
looked to higher objects than the mere acquisition Of
territorial government for Kansas IL provided Tor the
admission of Kansas State and 1t was the duty of the
government to admit that State with on without slavery,
constitution may provide, and not stopping here,
1t gave the people of that Territory the freedom TO
form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own
way subject only to the constitution Of the United States
He held that the authority Of the people fully recog
missed that popular sovereignty principle fully
enforced when the opportunity given TO the legal
vote to vote or delegates to that convention and he
would ask not these delegates the people agents
WISDOM prudence and sound policy required that the
action Of these delegates should be untrammeed IN the
formation Of that constitution He then proceeded III an
able defend the action Of the Lecompton con
vention, and to reply to the arguments against Oh
Msssrs. DOUGLAS and Walker.
Mr.. MONTGOMERY, of Pennsylvania, dissented to the
positions assumed by gentlemen that the Law OF nations
did not prevent our citizens from arming themselves,
banding together and invading the territory OF other ma
TONS and that the constitution of the United States
guaranteed power Congress to pass law to prevent
these acts II was strange position for gentlemen to
assume that when they entered upon treaty with
tion that treaty binding upon the nation and
not upon the people He maintained, as the true doc
ne that when at peace with nation every citizen was
peace Also and that what citizen could not do gov
eminent could not do. A treaty of peace broad
the Union and embraced not only every citizen, but
every resident within the Territory 1t contended
that nation would have right to interfere with the
acts of individuals He would say that this nation
bound for the act OF any individual who attempted
gIcssiye acts against nation with whom at
Mr., QUTTMAN, Of Mississippi, said that he took no
such position He contended that where there was a
declaration Of poace between nations it viola
tion of that declaration for individual number Of
individuals commit hostility against the individuals Of
that nation He referred to vattel to sustain his posi-
ton.
Mr. MONTGOMERY read from the document to
sustain his position He maintained that the government
had right to arrest man anywhere, and that extdi
ton treaties based upon that right The act OF
Walker outrage against the laws OF Nicaragua,
and he ought be arrested and sent back to that
try to be tried for violation of the law of nations The
day not far distant, unless the act of 1878
forced when the country would be precpitated ia
The President receiving the euloges of the whole
country for his He would say let them each and
all determine that they would stand by the President
and the future Of this country was entirely safe.
Mr.. zOLLICOFFER, of Tennessee, remarked that this
discussion had taken wide range and the questions in
volved in it had been deliberately drawn out There
rcasons however why he desired to make record
of his position upon Of the points involved init
In the he opposed repeal Of the neutrality
laws He believed it to be best policy, in view Of
the respect Of foreign powers that we should leave the
act Of 1918, preserving neutrality upon the statute
book He not llibuster and did not rise for the
purpose defending violations of the neutrality laws Of
the United States but had been impressed during the
progress of the debate that justice to General Walker
made it his duty to give his opinion of his conduct,
which had been violently denounced Epithets Of a
most exceptonabe character had been applied to him by
various members Of the House He had been denounced
pirate, robber, amudeIer, and who had vo
lated the laws Of the United States He did not believe
that he had violated the neutrality of 1878 He knew
that he not pirate robbe These epithets were
unjust and dscrcdtable to the gentlemen who had
ployed them He then reviewed the expeditions OF Walker
to sustain his position and maintained that the conduct
Of Commodore Paulding wholly unusfable but ac-
companied by cxtcnuatng circumstances.
Mr. STANTON, of Ohio, inquired if our government
would have the right to complain If Great Britain should
capture expedition fitted out in Jamaica for the pur
pose Of fillibustcring.
Mr. zOLLICOFFER replied that he did not believe that
il would be question that would Immediately
home to tho American Congress- They not author
lied to assume the guardianship the action of any
other government.
After further remarks to the same purport,
Mr. STEPHENS, Of Georgia, obtained the floor, wher
the committee rose and,
At twenty minutes to o'clock, the House adjourned.