The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-12-22

/
moved in the Senate for a committee Of investi-
gation2 Does the Senator from South Carolina
suppose that the Senate or the country has for
gotten how everything relating to Kansas was
managed here? A proposition offered in the
Senate of the United States to inquire into these
matters would have been secuted at the time.
recoect that | offered several propositions IL
order to remedy the difficulties in Kansas, not
one of which received the sanction of the Sen
ate. proposed to repeal the laws abridging the
freedom of speech in Kansas-laws which cub
jected man to imprisonment for years who
should venture to say that Slavery did not exist
in that Territory. All my propositions were
voted down.
| There was q condition of things then existing
that would have made any effort in this body TO
raise n committee of this kind perfectly useless.
Now, however, different feeling prevails. An
other arsenal has been taken possession Of There
is difference between the two cases. ! do not
understand that the arms of the Government at
Harpers Ferry WIRE appropriated to the use of
the insurgents, but in Missouri the public arms
were carried away, part have never been return
ed and the officer in command was directed TO
supply other portions by purchase, which he has
done.
/ think that the two things properly go to-
gether, and that one should be inquired into as
much as the other. AS great outrage was
committed four years ago, in taking possession
of the arsenal at Liberty, as was committed a
month or two ago. in taking possession of the
armory at Harper's Ferry. | spprehend that
where hundreds of dollars worth of property
were destroyed at Harper's Ferry, thousands
were destroyed in consequence of the taking
possession of the arsenal ut Liberty. | appre-
bend that where one life was lost in consequence
| of the acts at Harper's Ferry many lives were
lost in consequence OF the taking possession OF
the arsenal a. Liberty and the events that fol-
lowed it. Sir, il was with the arms which we're
| l,o1 naf at-Ra
| besieged. The army that encamped at Wska-
rusa armed with weapons from the United
States arsenal, - what extent am unable to
say. ] should like to see the official report that
was made to the War Department at the time
| this transaction occurred | recollect that we
passed resolutions calling upon the President, or
| upon the proper Department, and probably upon
both, for all the papers and correspondence in
regard to these matters, but have no recollec-
ton of having ever seen the official report of the
officer commanding at Liberty at the time the
arsenal was taken possession of by this Missouri
mob.
Now, sir, as 1 am up, will reply to some of
the statements of the Senator from South Caro-
lima. He says that he claims only that which
is the right of the Soutb-the right to take
| slaves to the common Territories of the United
States Sir, they have no such right. We do
not deny the equality of the States which hold
slaves. | much for maintaining the equal
from South Carolina; but what on earth has the
introduction of Slavery into Territory to do
with the rights of any State, North or South
Has any State, as State, right to take a slave
| into a Territory The Senator will not pretend
that Then why talk about State rights2 The
most that can be claimed is, that individuals re-
siding in different States of the Union may take
their property, if it happens to be in slaves, into
the Territories. Well that is not State right;
it is an individual right, if it exists At all. We
do not propose to impose on the Senator from
South Carolina, or any of his constituents,
| inequality in that respect IL he cannot take
slave into the Territory of Kansas, neither can l.
| If the citizens of South Carolina cannot take
Slavery Tiers neither the citizens of Illinois.
The rights OF each State are precisely the same.
| Now, you of the South threatening to
dissolve the Union, and break up the Confed-
eracy, because, as you charge, the Northern
people are assailants and sggressors on your
rights. Is the whole history of this country for
gotten? How is it, that the moment this Gov
eminent formed, one of the first acts of the
men who made it was to provide that Slavery
should not go into the Territories belonging 10
the United States Is it possible that the men
who made this Government would, in the first
| Congress that met under it, pass law so unjust
| to "A portion of the States Of the Union as to
justify their breaking it up? How was it that
South Carolina herself agreed to exclude Sla-
very from the State, then Territory, which |
have the honor, in part to represent
| Sir, lived under this policy the great
| Northwest settled under this policy of ex-
Guiding Slavery from the Territories of the Uni
ted States and how is it that neither South
Carolina nor Virginia found out that they were
not treated equals in this Confederaey2
| Why, sir. at so late period as lS4S, when a
Southern President of the United
States, Congress, by direct act, excluded Slavery
from Oregon. Now, can it be that there is any
such thing inequality or injustice to any
State of this Union in the exclusion of Slavery
from a Territory viii the Senator from South
Carolina do his ancestors the injustice TO believe
that they submitted to the degradation and dis
honor, he now calls it, of being excluded from
the common Territories of the country? Sir
| they chose it, not as degradation, not as a dis
honor, but for wise purposes, and TO accomplish
great ends. The founders of our Government
were men who, in their day, believed the insti-
tuition of Slavery to be an evil in the country.
They found it here. They did not see the means
| of getting rid of it Immediately. They would
not abolish it at once They conferred upon the
Federal Government no power to interfere with
it in the States which formed the Federal Gov
eminent; but they gave power to this Federal
| Government to prevent its extension. They took
steps Immediately after the Government was
organized to prevent Slavery from going into
any portion Of the territory then belonging to
the United States L know sir, that Slavery
went into Tennessee, Mississippi, and other
States, but il went there in defiance OF the Fed
eral Government. The territories composing
those States were coded to the United States ON
condition that the United States should not ex-
| clude Slavery from them but the territory
/ northwest of the river Ohio was ceded without
| any such condition, and Congress Immediately
excluded Slavery, with the acquiescence of the
/ South-yea, sir, the South itself moving in the
matter; and your own great man, the great
statesman of America, himself is the author OF
the provision which excluded Slavery from the
/ Northwestern Territory.
| We deny that there is any disposition in any
/ portion of the North to treat the South as une-
quals in this common Confederacy.
| Having shown that to some extent, wish to
/ come back, and inquire of the Senator from
South Carolina, and his associates, what is the
meaning of the resolutions adopted in the South
ern States, and of the speeches made by promi-
nent men IN the Southern States, in which they
declare that in case certain individual is elect
! ed President of these United States in a consti-
tutional way, or in case the Republican party
elect President of the United States, that they
will take steps for the formation of a Southern
Confederacy and the dissolution of the Union.
| Is not that treating unequals2 What do
| you mean by it2 You come into the Senate of
the United States, and charge the North with act
ing unequally and unjustly towards you and yet
you say to the North " although we have united
| together in common Confederacy, in which We
| have agreed that the Chief Magistrate shall be
elected in O particular way, and by a majority
expressed in the constitutional FORM yet ifyous so
elect a man, we will break up the Government"
What is that but saying, " we your saperiors,
and your majority shall submit to what the mi
nority think proper to dictate2"
Mr.. CHESTNUT. Does the Senator desire an