Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1860-04-11
THIRTY-s1xTH CONGRESS.

sea TIE Integrity oil the u mon, ana the neceS-
sty OF protecting slave property in the Terri
tory. Mr.. Salisbury, DEM, of Delaware, said
the Constitution recognized the right of one
man to have property in another man, against
the interference of States. Our fathers, he
said, knew no scapitaP' and sslabor'' States,
and by placing clause in the Constitution
| relative to the escape of fugitives from JUS
tce, recognized the rights of property in
slaves. He regarded the Missouri Compro-
mise as a blot and blur on the history of our
country, and charged Mr.. Seward, more than
all other men, with bringing the Union to the
verge Of destruction--that the banner of his
party was lawlessnesS, that the organization
was bound to nothing, and its actions were on
ly determined by exigencies. If what Mr..
Salisbury had said had been marked With any
degree of truth, Mr.. Seward and the Repub-
! lcans might be regarded as dangerous class
of men. Mr.. Ten Eyck, of N. j. put the is
sue on its true ground, by saying that the
question not slavery in the States, but its
extension into Territory now free. Mr.. Brown,
Dem., of Miss, said it was we'll known that he
contended a Territorial Legislature could a
bolsh slavery by non action, and that he IA
yored Congressional protection of property in
the Territories-hence he advocated the pas
sage of slave code. The House was engaged
on the bill to prohibit polygamy in Utah.
| There was difference of opinion expressed
by several Democrats as to whether Congress
4
| of Tenn, related an anecdote of two colOred
| persons conversing about the millennium, one
contending that tt e time had not yet come, while
| the other said when the time did come the
lamb would be found inside the lion. We
| have here the lion and the lamb lying down
together, said Mr.. E., and it remains for the
historian to find out which is the lamb and
which the lion. That his morality might not
be questioned, be would vote for the bill, and
this disposition should be attributed to his
early teaching of piety. He repeated, this
question brings up the whole power of Con-
I gress to govern the Territories, by which DEM
ocrats will be required to stand when the ques-
tion of slavery is involved. The Democratic
Catechism has been often revised, and so rap
idly that the people were not able to keep up
with the changes, and now he was required to
say that Congress has plenary power, all on
one side, provided it is in favor of the negro.
This was not yet published as the last au
thoritatiye exposition of the Democratic creed,
but it would have indorsers more respectable
than the Helper book. Incest, adultery. and
polygaEy kindred offences. If punish
ment may be extended to married persons,
it may be to single ones. If the law may be
applied to whites it may be applied to blacks.
The Constitution recognizes slavery more
than it does husband and wife. Mr.. Lamar,
Dem. Miss, inquired whether the gentleman
maintained and asserted the power of Congress
to punish slavery and crime in the Territories.
Mr.. Etherdge replied, he was showing the
difficulties gentlemen may have, for fear they
will not see them. Whoever votes for the
bill, does so with distinct understanding
that Congress has power to punish adultery,
and may extend the power to the Introduction
of slavery by unfriendly legislation. But he
would vote for the bill, because he believed
Congress would always have too much good
sense to do it. [Laughter.J Mr.. Singleton,
DEM, Miss, asked whether the gentleman by
voting for this bill, voted for the principle that
Congress has the right to abolish slavery in
the Territories. Mr.. Etheridge repeated that
he would vote for the bill in order to scour off
this nauseating offense land because he thought
Congress could prohibit it in Utah. 1t ex-
tends its provisions to blacks as well as whites.
AS to the operation on slavery, the only guar
antee he had was the good sense, libcrality,
and fair dealing of Congress. Mr.. Pryor re-
marked that the gentleman from Tennessee
said he regarded every one voting for this bill
voting for the right of Congress to abolish
slavery in the Territories. That might be
and was true as to the gentleman, but he, Pry
or, repudiated tina. view of the question. He
observed distinction between slavery and
polygamy under the Constitution. Mr.. Eth
eridge-I know you do; you have said SO. /
was only speaking for myself. Mr.. Lamar
My question is whether Congress has power
to declare and punish slavery as felony in
the Territories. Mr.. Etheridge-I admit the
power of Congress to legislate over black as
well white persons, and where this bill does
not embrace black persons, Congress may do
so. The gentleman from North Carolina, by
offering an amendment, sought to dodge the
questi on. Mr.. Branch, DEM, n. c., assurcd
the gentleman he did not want to dodge. Po-
lygamy might continue to exist before he
would vote for the first section of the bill. Mr..
Etheridge replied that the gentleman was will
ling to face the responsibility by voting against
h,,f fha aHn rAo6 hy-
his amendment narrow plank by which he
might escape from the burning wreck.
APRIL 3.-In the Senate, Mr.. Wilkinson, of
Minnesota, made a strong and sensible speech
in favor of the Homestead bill. The discus
sion of the polygamy bill was continued in
the House. Several Southern Democratic
members took strong ground in favor of the
power of Congress over the Territories. Pop
uar sovereignty Jared badly in their hands.
They were careful, however, to declare that
while Congress could rightfully abolish polyg
amy, the sstwin relic of barbarism''-sl
cannot be touched by it. In the course of
the debate, Mr.. Jenkins, a chivalrous Demo-
Graf, of Va, distinguished himself by telling
Mr.. Farnsworth that he uttered lie, to which
the latter replied that he was not in the habit
of descending into cesspools to throw dirt
with blackguards, and that ended the matter.
APRIL 4.-The Senate devoted itself to the
Homestead bill, without. however, coming to
vote. In the ueDate, Mr. Nl8lali, DeIn., oi
Texas, confirmed his title to the honors he
had won On former occasions. He spoke of
the Federal Government as ssthiS miserable
one-horse concern here in Washington;' said
the Homestead bill was for paupers it was
popular 10 talk of the poor; poverty was
crime and he would amend the title of the
bill to read, "For the encouragement of crime,
providing for criminals, and violating the Con-
sttution." Texas, he said, had right to do
what she pleased with her own property, to
give it to missionary society, to publish