The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-12-30
WASHINGTON. Dec. 2.

Mr. Fitzpatrick be appointed fresiden' VI
the Senate pro tenn.
MIR. Foote, of Vermont, said the more
recent practice of the Senate had been to
proceed to ballot.
The Senate then balloted for President,
pro tenn, with the following result: Mr..
Fitzpatrick, 80; Mr.. Foster, 10; Mr..
Hamlin, l. Mr.. Fitzpatrick then took the
chair.
The Chair then presented report from
the Treasurer of the United States, with
copies of his accounts for the third and
fourth quarters of 1858, and the first and
second quarters OF 1859.
Mr.. Mason of Virginia, asked that his
investigating committee be authorized to
employ clerk. Agreed to.
Mr.. Pugh called up his resolution sub
mitted on last Thursday, instructing the
Committee on Territories to inquire into
the expedency Of repeating so much of the
act of the organization of the Territorial
governments Of New Mexico and Utah, as
requires all laws passed by those Territories
to be submitted to Congress for approval or
rejection.
Mr.. Hale of New Hampshire said it was
not in order to proceed to legislative bust
ness prior to the organization of the House.
Mr.. Pugh stated that he desired to reply
to the remarks of the Senator of Georgia,
Mr.. Iverson, which he made the other day,
and he cared not whether he spoke on the
resolution or on the point of order. He de-
sired to defend the northern Democracy from
the charge of unsoundness, which did not
come with good grace from those in the
South, who had not done so much for the
party as the North. He spoke of the Difficult.
ty in the North of battling against section
alism, and defending the rights of the South.
They never elected the Senator from Geor-
gia to be Judge as to the soundness of their
Democracy. He repudiated the sentiment
that the position of Senator Douglas on
Territorial rights was akin to the Wilmot
| Proviso or anti. Democratic. He read from
speech in the Congressional Globe showing
that Cass sustained the same position.
Mr.. Pugh also quoted from the speech
delivered by Mr.. Iverson himself in the
House of Representatives eleven years ago,
which was as strong in support of nom
intervention views as Cass' famous Nichol-
son letter, or Douglas Freeport speech. He
Georgia legislature to her Senators when
the Kansas Nebraska bill was up, in favor
of non intervention, and he said he stood on
the Georgia platform. He proceeded to
reply to the remark of Mr.. Gwin that had
be understood the Kansas bill when he voted
for it as expounded by Douglas, he would
never have given that vote, by stating that
Mr.. Gwin did not vote of his own motion,
but was instructed by the California legs-
lature to give that vote, and that the legis
lature wrote down for him in that instruc-
ton what it thought the Kansas Nebraska
bill meant.
Mr.. Gwin-I voted before the instructions
got here.
Mr.. Pugh-I do not suppose the Senator
pretends that he is better exponent of the
views of his State than his legislature is.
Now, having read the non Intervention
platform of Georgia, I propose to read the
squatter sovereignty platform of California.
He then went on to remark that this
odious epithet "squatter sovereignty" which
has been used to frighten the people from
their propriety, was invented for the benefit
of California, and was applied to her in the
formation of her State constitution, in
which MIR. Gwin took an active part. The
Lecompton constitution was squatter sove-
reignty. He did not see any safe ground
upon which the advocates of the Lecompton
| constitution could stand for one moment.
The doctrine as announced by Mr.. Iverson
is to be the doctrine of the Democratic party.
Having quoted the sentiments of the Cali
fornia legislature while the Kansas bill was
up, Mr.. Pugh then proceeded to read the
Democratic platform, adopted in California
since the last session of Congress, which is
almost literally copied from the Ohio plat
form, drawn up by Mr.. Pugh himself.
He stated what be understood the Kansas
Nebraska bill to mean, adopting for that
purpose the language of the President who
signed the bill, giving bis own Interpretation
of it as found in the message of January
"a, 1856. He also quoted the resolutions
adopted by the Florida legislature in De-
cember, 1847. In support OF his position,
he said his object was to show that various
attempts are now being made contrary to
the opinions formerly entertained by the
legislatures of the Southern States to break
through the principles of the compromise
of 1850, and to break through the covenant
of the Kansas bill, and on that text to
preach sermons on the soundness or unsound.
ness of the Democracy. He quoted from
Mr.. OWNS speech, in Grass Valley, Cali
fornia, where it is stated that Mr.. Douglas
was deposed from the craftsmanship of the
Territorial committee on account of his
views on the Kansas bill.
He would not stand up here to defend
Mr.. Douglas who was able to speak for
himself. If he was expelled from that COM
mittee for that reason they might thereby
be compelled to expel ninety-nine hundredths
of the Democracy in every nonslaveholdng
State. 1t was no longer question of in
dividuals but of principle, and instead OF
assailing man who was absent it would be
more manly to do as Mr.. Iverson did, and
arraign the entire party. He could see
nothing in the Lecompton case that ought
to divide the Democrats, or make it neces-
sary to change the Committee on Terri.
tories, but the fact of the case seemed to
show that Mr.. Douglas was not removed
for that cause. After he had made his
speech in the Senate denouncing the Le-
compton constitution and taking issue with
the Administration and almost the entire
body of Democratic Senators North and
South, the Senate proceeded to put him