The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-01-27

Gus TO the interests OF Virginia, kentucky, Mary
land, Tennessee and Ohio, and that the United
States Government should use all its constitutional
powers by diplomacy to effect the abrogation of
these restrictions; also, should use all it's influence
by treaty stipulations with China and Japan, to
obtain the introduction of American tobacco into
those countries.
Mr.. NORRIS, of Pennsylvania, said the gentleman
from Delaware had not made his resolution COM
prehensive enough 1t proposed protection to only
one branch of American industry: it should have
included all.
Mr.. WHITLEY moved the previous question,
which was sustained and the resolution adopted by
yeas 81. noes 80.
Mr.. KELSEY reported bill in regard to the pub
lie domain, which was referred 70 the Committee of
the whole.
Mr.. GRow, of Pennsylvania, argued in favor of
not offering lands for sale until at least ten years
after they had been surveyed. The correctness of
this principle had been twice affirmed by the House
but had failed in the Senate.
1t was necessary in order to secure the land to
the actual settlers and prevent them from falling
into the hands OF spectators 1t was the duty of
the government to benefit the people to the fullest
extent its constitutions power and the opportu-
nifty was now presented to save the actual settlers
from falling into the hands of the remorseess spec
ulator. He moved to reconsider the vote by which
the bill of Mr. Kelsey was referred to the Commit
tee of the Whole, and on that he moved the previous
question.
Mr. STEPHENS, of Ca, moved to lay that motion
on the table.
Mr.. PHELPS moved to go into Committee of the
Whole.
Mr.. Grow gave notice that he would call I'D his
motion at 1212 o'clock tomorrow
The House then went into the Committee of the
Whole, and took up the Consular and Diplomatic
Appropriation bill.
The question was taken upon the proviso sub
mltted by MIR. CURRY yesterday in regard to the
appropriation for the payment of expenses in
Cured in pursuance of the act of 1919, and it was
lost.
Mr.. CRAWFORD, of Georgia, said he could not sup
mont thn -.,k,a - nm
effect the provisions of the act of lsl9 because
$4,000 would go to the Colonization Society for
supporting and educating the negroes taken from
the brig Echo, and moved to strike it out. The
law of 1919 only authorized the President to pro-
vide for the support of the negroes while here
and effect their removal beyond the limits of the
United States.
Mr.. STEWART of Nd, sustained the action of the
President as eminently wise and proper. The law
of 1919 required him to take charge of these ne
groes and deliver them to proper agent IT, in
efecting that result, it became necessary to make
contract with that agent for their support for
year. he could see no good ground for objection
In carrying out the law he thought the President
should be guided by principles of common sense
He was opposed to these superfne distinctions made
by gentlemen.
Mr.. MILLsoN, of Virginia. was surprised at the
senstiveness of southern gentlemen upon this sub
Ject, who seemed disposed to treat it as a matter
affecting the slave trade. He did not so regard it.
for in his opinion if the South condemned the slave
trade she repudated the basis on which her insti-
tutions rest. He thought the President had pur-
sued the proper course IN the premises, and quoted
from MIR. Monroe to show that in a previous case
he took the same ground as Mr.. Buchanan.
Mr.. CASE, of Indiana, moved to strike out the
whole section. He thought it should be stricken
out as an act of consistency in a country where
rights OF every sort were denied to negroes. Un-
der the very shadow of the capitol they were sub
Jected to outrage and wrong, and consistency re-
qulred that the same policy should be carried out
Mr.. kEITT, of 5. c., said gentlemen from his side
OF the house had not contended that this appropra
ton had anything to do with slavery or the slave
trade. They had opposed it on the ground that it
was in violation of law. The gentleman from Ohio
yesterday found the point of law against him. and
made out his argument by an appeal to the sympa-
thies of the House. A great deal had been said of
the horrors OF the middle passage of an unregula-
ted slave trade, but they fully equaled if not
surpassed, by the horrors of the emigrant passage
between Europe and the Northern States The
shores of New Jersey were whitened with the bones
OF the victims of the cupidity of eastern ship own
ers, and the carelessness of those having them in
charge.
He would not now discuss the question of re
opening the slave trade. He regarded that as a
great economic problem which would resolve itself
by its own inherent vitality.
Mr.. WHITLEY, of Delaware, moved to strike out
the enacting clause. Lost.
Mr.. CRAwFoRD's amend ment to reduce the ap-
preparation to S45, 900 carried by aves 76
noes SO.
Mr.. SEWARD, of Georgia, offered as amendment
provso for abolishng all the laws for the suppress
sion OF the slave trade, leaving that matter under
the control of the several States
MIR. BoNHAM, of South Carolina, offered an a.
mendment, striking out the last two lines which
was adopted.
Mr.. SEWARD, of Georgia, said he looked upon all
laws for the suppression of the slave trade as mis-
chievous and unconstitutional. He would not take
ground in favor of the revival of that trade but
the laws on the subject contained provisions which
were, in his judgment, clearly unconstitutional
Mr.. BURNETT protested against the revival of the
slavery agitation. The question of the revival of
the slave trade was not involved in the appropria-
ton under consideration, and he appealed to gem
tlemen not to engage in exciting debate upon a
subject not before them.
Mr.. SINGLETON said it was not his desire to pre-
clpitate dseussion but the only hope of the South
was in strict adherence to law. She was the |
weaker party, the abolitionists were constantly |
gaining upon her and she must interpose the law
between herself and her assailants. The appro-
prlatlon asked Tor was in violation of law and he |
had opposed it on that ground.
Mr.. CoCHRANE, of New York, said the House was |
discussing propositions not legitimatey before it,
If was proposed to repeal the law suppressing the
slave trade he was ready to meet the issue when it
was presented
MIR. GRoEsBECK said he hoped if that issue was to
be made, it would be made at once He was ready |
to meet it.. In his opinion it likely that
laws would be passed to more faithfully execute |
those in force than to repeal them.
Mr.. HUGHES, of Indiana, said that the Demo- |
cratic party was based upon the Constitution, and |
therefore he belonged to it; but whenever it should
propose to repeal the laws for the suppression of
the slave trade, it would cease to exist
Mr.. BARKsDALE, of Miss, regretted this debate
because it was not the proper time to discuss the
subject. He was ready to take his position when |
the issue came up. He believed the President had
violated the law in making the contract but he be-
lieved he was actuated by pure and honest motives
Mr.. CLAY, OF n.y., rose to a personal explanation. |
He had said yesterday that he opposed to all the
laws for the suppression of the slave trade because
tharr boo H., Iols H.
article of the treaty of Washington because out of
that had grown the entangng alliance with Great |
Britain which led to the perpetuaton of those out
RACES in the Gulf of Mexico by her cruisers. He
also objected to the expense were subjected to in
keeping squadron the coast of Africa, but not
these views man was more opposed |
to the revival of the African slave trade than he
was and he believed the people of his district
with him in that sentiment.
Mr.. MILES, of s. c., said he was that buebear a |
sectional man. He represented in part the South, |
which being the weaker party had to unite in order
to protect herself, and was therefore sectional He
was not Democrat in the party sense of the word |
He went with the Democracy so far as they ad-
hered to the Constitution and the laws, but the
moment they asked him to swerve inch
from principles he would turn his back upon
them forever. He was not prepared now to advo-
cate the revival of the slave trade but he did wish
to wipe out all laws that stigmatzed that trade as
piracy, for II 1t was piracy now it was when
first practised, and he would not consent to alfix
such stain upon his forefathers and upon the peo-
pie of his section, whose institutions were based
upon that trade. He believed that the laws on |
the subject were unconstitutional, and while he
would not say that it polite now to reopen the
the trade, it might be necessary if England and |
France carried it covertly. He denounced the
Coolie system as infinitely less mild and humane
than that of African slavery as it existed in this
country.
Mr.. GooCH, of Mass, expressed his satisfaction
that so much light had been shed on the subject,
and made some remarks in opposition to the slave
system.
MIR. CASES motion to strike out the whole section
was carried by yeas l04, nays 26, when the Com
mittee rose and the House adjourned
TEXAS,
Letters to the Indian Bureau, and Texas papers
at at hat h.,