Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-11-01

which the doctrine of the res lotion of slave
ry from the territories, by congressional ac-
zion, was boldly proclaimed. Mr.. Thayer then
proceeded TO a reiteration of the false state
ment he had many times epsgted, that
Worcester paper had mutilated portion OF
Geographic dispatch, by suppressing the state
ment that Col. Baker entertained views SINH
lar TO those of Eli Thayer, on popular sOver-
eighty. The speaker then went on to discuss
the clauses of the constitution of Oregon OBJ
jected to by the republicans, admitting they
were against his own feelings and views. He
claimed that these Objectionable clauses were
originated by the republicans, and were a COM
promise between them aud the half way party,
by which the votes of the latter were secured
to the free state movement. As for any viola
ton OF the rights of the black citizens of Mas
sachusetts, those rights may be yindicated by
a decision OF the supreme court of the United
States. Consequently that clause is a nullity.
Mr.. Thayer then recited a portion of one of
his congressional speeches, lauding the people
of Oregon as the embodiment Of everything
that Is great in people.
Mr.. PARKER then resumed the floor amid
tremendous applause. He said he was sorry
his opponent had not replied to his questions.
In reply to the taunt OF Mr. Thayer, that he
(Parker) did not comprehend the difference in
nature between the powers involved, jou1Sdic-
ton and sovereignty, he replied that it is differ
ence which under our government does not
exist. Great Britain, as government, pos
sesSeS i'll some instances jurisdiction over
islands where she has not S0Uereignty, but the
United States have never had such a depend.
ency. He read from speeches OF Seward,
Chase, Sherman, Case, and other distinguished
republicans, Oh the subject of intervention,
each and all sustaining the duty of congress
Al.
domain.
He then referred to NJ Thayer's claim that
the republicans in congress, in voting for the
Crittenden Montgomery amendment, had aban-
doned the doctrine of prohibition embodied in
the Philadelphia platform, and read from the
speeches Of the republicans in congress to
prove that it was merely temporary exped-
ency for Kansas, not a final remuneration of
the doctrine of prohibition. Mr. Parker cited
many instances in the history Of the world
when, for the accomplishment of some pur-
pose, fundamental principles have been aban-
doned temporarily, but Immediately resumed
when the purpose was effected.
Mr.. Parker then proceeded to discuss the
vote on the Utah bill Mr.. Thayer had pro
posed to root up the evil of polygamy, by
dividing the territory Into two portions, add
ing much additional territory, and allowing
the evil to exist in two territories instead of
one. CHEERS. He would ask the gentle
man
Would you vote for bill to extirpate or put
a stop to polygamy in Utah if such a bill
were to be presented in congress for your vote,
and you felt assured it would accomplish its
purpose and design!
MIR. THAYER-I will answer in my speech.
Mr.. PARKER hope you will not forget to
answer, as YOU did all of my other questions
except the first one. Laughter.
Mr.. THAYER then resumed the floor. Again,
said he, have the opinions of jursts been
dragged into this debate reminding us of the
old territorial policy of the government
None of this was new to him he admitted
this to be the old practice. The Philadelphia
platform had again been quoted as authority
But all this was irrevelant to the question at
issue. The Chicago platform had adopted the
totally different doctrine, that the constitution
itself carries freedom to the territories, thus
excluding slavery. He then proceeded to an
extended defence of his popular sovereignty
views in glowing terms, stating his position to
be, that the people of a territory should have
the privilege, not only of making their own
laws, but OF electing all their officers He
closed, without even so much as passing
glance at the polygamy question, proposed to
him.
MIR. PARKER then resumed. He said Mr.. t.
had display ed great shrewdness in not answer
ing his questions, for he must have seen that
which ever way he answered we have got
him. Mr.. I. complained that he( Parker) had
produced antiquarian authorities IL support of
his views; he had been back no further than
lI9I, but lhGyeT had gone Cdy back to old Juded
Laughter Mr. Parker then read from Otis,
John and Samuel Adams and other statesmen
OF the revolution, to prove that they defined
the rights of the colonies OrppiSalv tho ra-
publicans define the rights of the territories
lie quoted from message OF the squatter
sovereign Abertheney OF Oregon, several
years ago, expressing the hope that the en-
OdffasSmen Of oregon lc0uld be relieved By the
establishment Of a territorial government by con-
9feSS ana from subsequent message, after
the establishment OF territorial government 1chen
great joy 'cas expressed at the fact. There was
the voice OF the people. Immense cheering. J
Inc people OF every territory, when organic
ed, has delegate IN congress, he speaks for
them, has all the rights OF any member aside
from voting. The legislative and other eX-
penses OF the territorial governments were
all paid by congress, so that the cry of "Tax-
alton without representation" was wrong when
applied to territorial government. Of this
notion, not an instance could be shown in the
history of this government of territorial pro-
test m against IT. except IN me case OF Kansas,
MI aiAe, tilen ploceeueu 10 discuss the
" N.Y. D,ns' ueg"'eu Wl'h 'e cohilVahce
VI MI may r' MI; gro" OF pennsylvania,
Libiton Of slavery tor he organizaIion IF laV
eral territories. Mr. KELLOGG of U;nn;s ,yiSI.
cd IN i,troduno a., o,,,,,l,,t9,t1,t
of fine territories when thev shonId uin,l,ar
twenty thonsand sbould he aiIowaJ 70 snIoot
tLeir avn of,icors IT. TLa',ar ,a.o,@J
hon on This nronosition INV nigv;no t to v tIo
lille IN tha XIX Tho a',ir, wv
in the house nresent viii ahort Lai doao,
nxcentions voted nnoinst Iavino tha I;llS or
the table And VIZ tI,a 'y7,;as 't',I J