Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-01-19


He could not vote for a South American, be-
cause that party is in favor of a slave code in
the territories. If it is not so, let one of them
deny it.
Mr.. HARDEMAN said he was in favor of such
a code, and that he intends to demand every
southern right.
Mr.. QUARLEs was for equality, aud believed
that Tennessee has a right to carry slaves into
the territories, and right to claim every arm
of government to protect II.
Mr.. ETHERIDGE said, so help him God, he
would never give vote to put slavery in the
territories. while the Nebraska Kansas bill, ac-
cording to the construction put upon it at the
time of its passage, remains in force; for it
gives the right to the people, while in the ter
ritorial condition, to regulate slavery in their
own way.
Mr.. BoTELER, in response to question by
Mr.. Carter, and, also, Mr.. Moore of Kentucky,
said they were in favor of protecting slave
property in the territories, and the former said
no territory can interfere with those rights.
Mr.. BRIGGs explained that he never believ-
ed a necessity existed for legislation on slave
~ in the territories. He approved of non-in-
PREVENTION in the territories.
Mr.. CARTER understood the southern oppo-
sition to be in favor of a slave code. He ask
ed if the north western, and other democrats,
were in favor of such a code,
Mr.. NORRIS of Illinois, said he was not.
Mr.. MCRAE-Why did you not ask the
question of Mr.. Gilmer?
Mr.. CARTER replied that he had, at a for
mer stage of the proceedings, given all the
southern opposition an opportunity to answer
Mr.. BURNETT claimed that Mr.. Carter had
yielded the floor to Mr.. McRae.
Mr.. CARTER earnestly denied this, amid
peals of laughter. Much confusion.
Mr.. MCRAE replied, why did you not put
the question to Mr. Gilmer7
Mr.. CATHERINE. Gilmer is of age and can
answer for himself. Laughter)
Mr.. McRAE-You have voted for Mr.. Gil"
mer, and now wont let him answer.
Mr.. CARTER again asked whether northern
democrats were in favor of slave code.
Mr.. MCRAE said he would answer, if af-
ter that he would ask Mr.. Gilmer the ques-
ton.
Mr.. CATHERINE sir (Laughter.)
Mr.. BURNETT wanted Mr. Carter to finish
his speech or yield the floor altogether. He
understood that Mr. Rust was entitled to it.
The clerk said Mr. Carter had right to yield
it to Mr.. MoRAE. The latter answered the
question by sending all exact form of a letter
written by him in June last from which it APP
pears that he does not ask for "A congressional
slave code or legislation in advance of neces-
sity for it. He does not ask intervention
" piOitlbit VI GSldOlSll SldNtIJ. lIG ClilluS
that when slavery is established, and the terri.
tory shall fail or refuse to pass laws for its Sc
curity, or shall pass laws unfriendly to slave
ry, then it will become the duty OF Congress to
provide laws for its protection. lie maintain
ed that slavery is sustained by the Bible and
Christianity, and understood that the Democ-
racy regard this as a judicial question.
Mr.. CARTER inquired whether the Demo-
cratic party would vote for the admission of
Kansas into the Union, under such a constitu-
ton as the people may choose to adopt.
Mr.. MCRAE, before answering that question,
wished to know whether the Republican party
believed in the right OF property i'll black by
white men.
Mr.. CARTER had distinctly stated that he
belonged to no party. He had spoken for
himself under our form of government, and
the spirit by which it was established. He de-
MED that it acknowledged property in any hui
man being.
(Cries from the Democratic side-"That is
the higher lawn
Mr.. MCRAE replied, that he wanted to know
of one gentleman who took the position that
our government, under the constitution, does
not recognize slavery. He said Mr.. Carter
was disunlonlst and an unconstitutional man.
Was the fugitive slave law constitutional!
Mr.. CARTER called attention to the intention
Vi tHS setlbJ lIIS d
the right to establish slavery if it chose, it
could not extend slavery one inch beyond its
line
The colloqny was further continued by these
gentlemen, and was very spirited.
MIR. Cox, in response to the question Of Mr..
Carter, as to the views of the western Democ-
racy on the subject of a slave code, sent up
the resolutions Of the late Ohio Convention, as
a crystalization of the opinions of the Democ-
racy of that state, in which non-intervention
with slavery is declared.
Mr.. HARDEMAN said he affiliated with the
Georgia Democracy, and therefore differed
from the gentleman from Ohio
Mr.. Cox replied, that he spoke the senti-
ments of the Ohio Democracy.
Mr.. HARDEMAN said with earnestness, the
South stand by her rights, and would maintain
them.
MIR. Cox, in the course of his remarks, said
if there were differences among Democrats
which could not be reconcied in their way,
they would submit to the arbtrament of the
national convention. He did not want it sent
out by the Republicans that northern Demo
Gratis sit here under the lash OF southern Dem
ocrats, and dare not speak the sentiments OF
their constituency, and of their own hearts.
There were no insuperable differences among
Democrats that would prevent them coming
together on the same platform
Mr.. McCLERNAND briefly expressed his
views and the views of the Illinois Democrat
cy, believing that the people of the territories
have a right to form and regulate their insti-
tutions in their own way subject to the consti-
ton.
Mr.. HOLMAN explained the position of the
Democrats Of Indiana on the subject of slavery
in the enthusiastically, non-interference
and the Interpretation given by Mr. Buchanan
in his letter accepting the nomination TO the
Presidency.
Mr.. MONTGOMERY said the qualification pro-
pounded by Mr. Carter was an abstraction.
There was not a single member on the
floor who proposed or intended to propose
a measure Tor the protection of slaves in the
territories. There was not a single territory
where such a law would become necessary
therefore the question was a mere firebrand
thrown in here for the purpose of distractng
and dividing the Democratic party There
should be no law either to prohibit or to estab
fish slavery, that should be left to the people
themselves. He said 16 of his colleagues had
voted for Mr.. Gilmer who was not only large
stakeholder but also an advocate of the code.
Go home to your constituents
Mr.. MooRHEAD said he had voted for Mr.
Gilmer because the latter was in favor of pro-
lection to American industry. If he thought
his constituents would meet him with the same
scorn and indignation as they would meet Mr..
Montgomery, he would go home. His col
leage had eaten dirt to obtain the votes of Re-
publicans, and crawled to them for their sup
port.
Mr.. MONTGOMERY replied that he was elect
ed by 5000 majority. As to eating dirt, it was
false in every particular His colleague had
crawled into the caves and cellars of Know
Nothingism, then come out and betrayed the
party he had sworn to support then turned
Republican, and all within three or four years.
His colleague should be the last man TO talk