The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1859-03-05

| Wednesday, Fc6. 90. in the Senate, the
! consideration of the Legislative, judicial,
and Executive Appropriation bill was re-
sumed. Mr.. Hale moved an amendment to
strike out the item Of $40, COO for taking
the census Of Kansas, and to repeal the re-
| strictive clause in the English bill. This
amendment proved perfect fire brand, and
rc-opened, for the first time at this session,
the Kansas discussion. Mr.. Hale sa d Ore
gon had been admitted without any such re-
striction being imposed, and he called on the
Oregon Senators to do justice to Kansas
Messrs. Lane and Smith, of Oregon, said,
when Kansas came before Congress for ad-
mission, they would act with justice toward
her. Mr.. Stuart, of Michigan, said he would
vote agains. requiring census of Kansas to
be taken.
Mr. Douglas took the floor and said that
his sentiments were well known; they have
undergone no change, and he did not ex-
pect they would change. He held that
Kansas ought to come in. irrespective of the
census, with such constitution as she shall
choose Hence he did not admit of the ne
cessity Of the appropriation. He wanted
either the appropriation stricken out, or the
representative clause repealed.
Mr.. Green entered his protest against the
Introduction Of this exciting and nfam-
matory subject. He mentioned that be was
day authorized 10 report against a consti-
tuition framed at Leavcnworth, which had
been offered by the Senator from New York.
and that he was delaying it at the instance
of the delegate from the territory, who saws
that the people do not wish TO come in under
teat constitution.
Mr.. Seward said Congress had decided
that Kansas might come in under the Le-
compton constitution without reference to
population, but not otherwise unless she had
%, 400 inhabitants. Here was a discrimna.
ton against freedom and in favor OF slavery.
Oregon, because she was n democratic State
was admitted without reference 10 popula-
ton, and Kansas, because Of different poll.
tics was excluded.
Mr.. Brown, of Mississippi, made a strong
southern speech. lie held TO the doctrine
of States Rights, denied the squatier soye-
reignty Of Territories, if the South was de-
prived Of her rights. His address was d
rected to Northern Democrats. He ploced
his views frankly on record, and desired
neither to cheat nor be cheated.
Mr. Douglas felt it incumbent on him as a
Northern Democrat to make reply. He
admired the frarkness, cardor and direct
ness with which M Brown had approached
the question. lie, Douglas too, would put
h 5 opinions on record IN such 4 manner as
will acnuit him also of desire TO cheat OF
to be cheated. He agreed at the outset with
Mr.. Brown. and with the decision Of the
Supreme Court, that slaves are property,
and that their owners have a RI ght TO carry
them into Territory the same as any other
property. Having the right OF transit into
the Territory, the question arises, how far
does the power OF the Territorial Legislature
extend TO slave property, and the reply IL, TO
the same extent, ana no further than 10 any
other description Of property. Nr. Brown
has said that slave property needs more pro-
lection than any other description. II so, il
is the usfortunes Of the owners Of that
kind Of property. Mr.. Douglas remarks
from the frequent Interruptions assumed SO
much the form OF question and reply, and
running comments on the various issues
started, that we can only notice the salient
points Of the main discussion, which ex-
tended throughout many hours, he sustain
ing the principal part. His general scope
vas that he would leave all descriptions of
property, slaves included, to the operation
Of the local law, and would rot have Con
gress interfere in any way Herewith. II
the people OF the Territory want slavery
there, they will foster and encourage 1t, and
If they do not fnl it for their advantage.
they will do otherwise. So it becomes
question OF soil, climate, production, etc.
Mr.. Davis replied TO Mr.. Douglas e!abo-
rately, denying that he Douglas rightly in
terpretcd the obligations Of the Democratic
party.
Mr. Pugh said Mr.. Brown had asked if
Northern Democrats would vote for Con-
gresSional Intervention 10 protect the people
against local legislation. lie would answer,
never. 1t is monstrous. Il is against the
p'ighted faith both OF the South and North
Mr.. Pugh discussed the question at length,
and said he stood on the platform OF his
party with the Interpretation which he ex
planned.
Mr. Green was sorry that this subject Of
contention had been brought forward. It
was to try and bring discord into tho Demo
cratic party, the only party able to override
the Republican party. He hoped and be-
iieved there was no difference between the
North and the South.
Mr.. Davis took an animated part in the
debate against Mr.. Douglas, whe, in the
Kansas Nebraska act, had made a great
error, and drawn the Senate into o great
error.
Mr.. Douglas resumed, say ing it won't dc
to read him out, because they had fallen
from the faith. There is no middle ground.
1t is either intervention. or non Intervention.
Mr.. Gvin said if the Senator from Illinois
had given the same Interpretation 10 the
Kansas Nebraska bill when it was before the
Senate, he (Gwin) would not have voted for
it, and believed those around him would not.
When the Senator proposed 10 speak for the
Democracy of the Free States, he had TO
right to speak for California, which thought
otherwise.
Mr. Frederick contra6ictcd Mr.. OWNS
statement OF the views of California. He
considered the views Of his State were those
expressed by Mr.. Douglas.
Mr.. Douglas 60 Mr.. Gwin)-1 do say the
records show very general concurrence IN
the views then expressed.
Mr.. Iverson raised the question Of order
that Mr.. Douglas had spoken many times. -
lie and Mr.. Davis had occupied the floor
feur or five hours.
The debate was continued by Messrs.
Hunter, Stuart, Bigle-, Clingman, Fessen-
den, Hale, Doclitlc, Clark, Trumbull, and
Crttenden, until four or five o'clock Thurs
day morning, when the vote was taken on
Hale's amendment, and was lost, as follows ::
leas-MesSrS. Broderlck, cameron, Chan-
dler, Clark, Collamer,. Dixon, Doolit,le,
Douglas. Durkee, FesseRden, Foot, Foster,
Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Trumbull,
! Wade, Wilson-l9.
Nays--Mcssrs. Bigler, Chestnut, Clingman,
Clay, Crlttenden, Davis, Fitch, Fitzpatrick,
Green, Gwin, Houston, Hunter, 1verson,
johnson tTenn.) Johnson (Ark.,( Kennedy,
Lane, Polk, Pugh, Reid, Rice. Sebastian,
Slidell, Smith, Toomhs, Ward, Yuiee-27.
Mr.. Mason paired off with Mr.. Stuart
In the House the post Office appropriation
was discussed all Cay, without reaching a
vote. Mr.. Montgomery offered tariff md
revenue bill as an amendment, but it was
ruled out Of order.
Thursday, FEB. 2+.-The Senate was all