The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-04-14

ana considers itself aggrieFeo, ' - -.
S,Ia On What kind of eminence do we stand,
r.. k;nd of meat do we feed on, that we can
NOT be, approached respectfully by sovereign
State of this Union, and requested to recon-
slider our action in matter of vital importance
to that Slater 1t is new idea. The Senator
who stands at the head of the Judiciary Com
mittee differs entirely from his colleague, the
Senator from Ohio. He says that the proper
mode of approaching this question would have
been by petition alone; but the Senator from
Ohio, in his argument, said they had no right to
petition on the subject at all that they had no
power to petition.
Mr.. PUGH. Where does the Senator gather
that2
Mr. FESSENDEN. From what you said.
Mr.. PUGH. say the pretence that this petit
ton is the act of the State of Indiana is all a
sham. The Constitution of the State OF Indiana
does not constitute her Legislature petitioner.
Mr.. FESSENDEN That is it, exactly; that,
inasmuch as the Constitution of Indiana had not
constituted her Legislature petitioners, therefore
they had no eight to petition on this subject.
On the contrary, the Senator from Delaware
says the proper mode would have been by petit
ton alone.
Mr.. BAYARD Will the honorable Senator
allow me to EXPLAIN
Mr.. FESSENDEN. Certainly.
Mr.. BAYARD. i said that the disrespect was
Judgment of the Senate | neither said nor IN
timated, whether they bad or had not the right
to petition. If State chooses to petition or to
memorabilia the Senate on any subject-matter,
atn willing to consider her memorial. The DIS
respect was involved in the act of election, not
in memorialzing and on that memorial l ar
rived at the conclusion the committee did-that
the subject had passed from the further action
of the Senate by the Judgment rendered at the
previous session.
Mr. FESSENDEN. The committee have made
no such decision. The conclusion they came to
is, that the matter is settled, and they will not
rehear it. The reason given for it by the Senator
from Delaware-and | think it is so stated In
the reports, that the Legislature of the State
of Indiana had undertaken to revise the decision
of this body. Suppose they have elected Sena-
tors their election Of Senators does not make
them So They have right to express their
opinions and they may express them in that way
as well as in any other. If the seats are filled,
the election goes for nothing. Is that disre-
spect? They do all that the Senator suggests
they present their petition. 1t is couched In
respectful language. What does the Senator
say2 q will not consider your respectful petit
ton, because you have done act which is an
offence to the Senate of the United States" Sir,
is that an argument2
Mr.. BAYARD. | did not say that at all.
it but that is the legitimate result of his argu-
ment.
Mr.. BAYARD. No, sir. We did not consider
their petition because we decided that the case
having been disposed of, the petition could not
be maintained.
Mr.. FESSENDEN. But what is the conclusion
he comes to2 We ask that these gentlemen may
be heard; we ask that the State of Indiana may
stand before us by its own representatives. The
Sfota of nd n 10
a courtesy which has never in any case been
denied before. Those who have been selected as
Senators or Representatives from State, have
always been allowed to appear before the body
and state the grounds upon which they claim
seats. When we ask this customary privilege
for these gentlemen, what is the answer that is
nader That they shall not come inside of these
doors. Sir, we asked for the State of Indiana
simply the ordinary courtesy which might have
been extended to two gentlemen whom that
State chooses TO consider her Senators, that they
might be admitted on this floor until this ques-
ton is settled might be permitted to sit upon
these sofas, and not sent into the galleries, or
elsewhere That was received with contemptu-
Gus Indifference and denal--even that. Then,
| when the State of Indiana, through its agents,
goes little further and respectfully requests
that these gentlemen may appear and state the
grounds of the claim of that State before this
/
| have treated the Senate of the United States
with disr sspect, and cannot permit you to
come here and show even that this question has
not been decided"
more upon Tins subject than had any
idea of doing ] do not propose to review III .
question itself; that was argued fully before but
| cannot avoid abiding in some degree, in as
few words as | can use, to what | consider the
contradictory ground upon which gentlemen
| hay cd 70 hat 10
| to me, determination that this matter shall not
even be presented fairly before the Senate of the
| United States. How much difficulty we have
had in presenting the matter at all Did Sena-
tors suppose that after repeated efforts we had
not the power in any possible way to get the
| subject before the Senate and before the coun-
| try2 The Senator from Missouri seems to think
that we are committing grave fault or that my
friend from New York was speaking language
that might have an effect upon the people of
| Indiana. Sir, no day passes, as Senators well
know, that language of that description is not
used on this floor by somebody, in relation to
| something; and certainly, when State consid-
ers its honor and its rights involved, it is diff
cult for any Senator, in addressing this body to
use language which may not have an effect to
show either that it has been injured or has not
| been. One side or the other of that question is
inevitable. | believe that nobody here can Justly
accuse me of ever talking much for the sake of
| outside effect upon anybody. | endeavor TO ad-
dress myself to the questions before the Senate /;
| but sir am willing now to express my opinion
| and, like the Senator from New Hampshire
give it only as opinion considered the decision
of the Senate, at the time it was made as in ut
ter defiance OF the rights of the State of Indiana
| considered then, that the two gentlemen adj
mitted to seats on this floor had no more right
here than any other two men who could be
picked up from that State, any other, and
came here claiming seats but, at the same time
knew that the decision, if made, would be ad-
hered to. My opinion may be wrong, but it is
satisfactory to me. | mean no disrespect to
gentlemen when | express it | impute improper
motives to no man. Such was my opinion of the
decision ITSELF and have not changed it. When
State comes here, having acted legally through
its Legislature, having shown the regular legis-
lathe action, and sent its men, and requested
simply that they might be heard before the State
was judged, think il is dealing a hard, harsh,
a cOntemptuOus measure to a sovereign State of
this UniOn especially on the part of those who
claim to be the especial champions of State rights
and State sovereignty, to say that they shall not
he heard here because this question has been
decided when they, according to the arguments
of gentlemen, were not even party to the de-
cision that was made
1 Mr.. HARLAN. Mr.. President | shall occupy
the attention of the Senate for but few mo-
nents in relation to the history rected by
The Senator from Louisiana. | think he errs
Greatly in snpposing. that the Democratic party,
ss a party has ever condemned the doctrine
that one branch of q State Legislature has the
right to defeat the election of Senators to the
Senate OF the United States. At least, the De-
mocracy of Indiana have never taken such DO
stion. AT the session next preceding the one
OF which the Senator from Louisiana complains,
the Democratic majority in the Senate refused
to unite with the Republican majority of the
House to elect a United States Senator; and