The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-12-30


tanned by almost the entire body of the
Democratic party in the North. He
would not appeal to his Northern brethren
in the Northern States whether they recog.
nized this as a test of Democratic fellow
ship, if, as the Senator from California has
proclaimed, you are parties to the act of
decaptitation. Do you mean to have it 90
forth to the country that whoever entertains
these opinions is unfit to be member of the
Democratic party?
Mr.. Rice, of Mimi was not party
to the transaction, and do not uphold it."
| Mr.. Pugh went on to refer to the usage
of the Senate on the subject of committees.
LIST, never to dispace Senator without his
consent and 2ud, never to promote any
one else over him. He was soon going out
of the Senate, and would therefore frankly
declare that this usage was intolerably bad.
1t was usage which has operated to give
the Senators from slaveholding States the
the chair on every committee, controlling
public business. The Senator from Illinois
was the only exception, and has been decapi-
tated now. He thought the simplest way out
of all this controversy was to do justice and
put down these attempts from one section of
tho Union or the other to disturb the plat
form of the Democratic party. He regret
ted the excitement prevailing at present on
the slavery question. The proceeding in
the House of Representatives. as well as in
some of the State Legislatures, ought to ad-
monish us that we have fallen on evil times.
We hear defiance and threats from one quar-
ter and the other, which are fraught with
danger to this glorious Union.
Mr.. Iverson said he would take some fu-
ture occasion to respond to these remarks of
Mr.. Pugh, which were applicable to himself,
and also to ventiate some other subjects
which had been touched upon by the Sena-
tor from Ohio.
Mr.. Gwin explained the action of the
California legislature in reference to those
resolutions referred to and quoted by MIR.
Pugh. They intended to take the subject
away from Congress, and leave it to the
Judicial tribunals of the country, who are the
only proper tribunals to decide such ques-
lions. The position of the Democratic
party in California is that they are purely
judicial questions as to the action in the case
of Senator Douglas.
He said it was the duty Of that Senator to
be here when the Senate was organized, and
he also contended it was right that the
majority of the Democratic Senators, who
were the majority of this body, and who
were responsible for its organization, should
no longer place man at the head of the
territorial committee holding opinions in
direct conflict with that majority on the
subject of territorial power. With regard
to what MIR. Pugh had said about 99-100ths
of the Democracy and every non-save hold
ing State agreeing with Mr.. Douglas, Mr..
Gwin said Mr.. Pugh might speak for Ohio,
but that was not the doctrine of California.
That question had been tried before the peo-
pie, and, by an overwhelming majority, those
who agree with Douglas have been con-
demned. The maintenance of that doctrine
is dangerous to the Democratic party.
A long colloquial debate ensued between
Gwin and Pugh, in which Mr.. Davis, of
Mississippi, also participated. Presenting
no points of special interest.
Mr.. Hale hoped that inasmuch as the
question of order he raised this morning had
not been elucidated, the chair could now
decide that point.
Mr.. Lane, of Oregon, desired to say a
few words on the question which had been
up, if Mr.. Hale would withdraw.
Mr.. Hale-I will withdraw anything the
Senator from Oregon desires. Laughter.
Mr.. Lane remarked, it was not his pur-
pose to prescribe rules or lay down plat
form for the Democratic party. He had
nothing to do with the case of Douglas, and
he had no doubt there were many good
Democrats in the northern States that did
not agree upon this question of territorial
right with the majority of the party, he
would not say they were not good Demo-
Gratis because they disagreed with him, nor
would he say that not holding the views of
Mr.. Douglas would have been reason for
him to oppose that gentleman as chairman
of the Committee on Territories. He was
sorry to find his own views on the territorial
question differed very materially from Mr.
Pugh's. He held that a territory is the
common property of the whole people, in
which every State in the Union has equal
rights; and that while in territorial state,
the people could not by unfriendly legisla-
ton, or by a system of equal taxation,
infringe the rights of the people of any State
of the Union. In the case of Arizona, for
instance, which was adapted to slave labor,
he would not submit to it that the people of
the south should 60 there and by unfriendly
legislation exclude the people of the north.
The principle of the equality of the States
must be maintained, and their equal rights
in the territories was so clear in his mind
that he could not see how any man could
doubt it.
Mr.. Brown, OF Mississippi, protested
against the assumption on which Mr..
Pughs resolutions were based; that there
are no laws in New Mexico establishing
slavery slavery went there under the con.
stitution, as horses dry goods, or any other
property went, and then the legislature under
solemn duty, made laws protecting it.
These laws did not establish it there
Mr. Lane remarked that he would submit
to no wrong, nor would he seek to do any,
but he only desired to carry out the princi-
pie ofsecuring to every section of the country
equal rights.
Mr.. Brown commended Mr.. Pugh's
speech for its broad nationality, and con-
CURED most heartily in many things he had
said. 1t seemed to him the views of the
different Senators could be harmonized, and
in order to do so, he would give his own
position. First, he held that slaves were
| recOUnizpd az nrOnertv nnder tho coretitn.