Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-09-15

southern men were insulted, and withdrew iron | the hall, and invited all to follow. At last MT l Mckay, of s. C., made point of order, whicl | was sustained when another member moved al adjournment (Slade still standing, and ready to gt | on), which was carried 63 members voting witt MT. ADAMS against the adjournment among thos, | voting against the adjournment was JOHN BELL | while the chole South roted for the adjournment This opposition to adjournment,'' says Mir BENTON, was one of the worst features of tha unhappy days work-the only effect of keeping the house together being to increase irritation anc multiply the chances for an outbreak. From tho beginning, southern members had been in favor o it, and essayed to accomplish it, but were prevented by the tenacity with which Mr. SHADE kept ths floor; and now at last when it was time to adjourn any way-when the house was in a condition il which no good could be expected, and great harm might be apprehended, there were 63 members being nearly one-thrd of the house, willing te continue its session.
 The southern members held meeting, and il was proposed to abandon their seats and return te their constituents; but more moderate counsel pre- vailed. They adopted rule to be presented tc the House, that no more abolition petitions should be received, which resolution was introduced by MT. PATTON, of Va. ADAMS was opposed to the rule, PATTON moved the previous question, and the 63 who voted against the adjournment, incud ing Mr. BELL, voted against the previous question The rule, however, prevailed by vote of l22 tc "A; BELL retusing to uote on the caU
 The passage of this rule cut off exciting debate and queted agitation for while; but in June 1888, Mir. ADAMS took occasion in speech to de clare that the slaves had right to petition fol their freedom and said he would cheertully present such petition. The Speaker called him to order He appealed to the House. The Speaker was sus- tained--eoery member voting to sustain him, ex- cept MT. BELL and the dcknopledged abelitionists.
 rfr in tha of y,.&.o were introduced by member from New Hamp- shire, asserting 'that the government was one of limited pocers-that it had no jurisdiction the States-that petitions to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and in the Territories, and against the removal of slaves from one State to another, was part of plan set foot to abolish slavery-that Congress had no right to do that in- directly which it could not do directly-that the continued agitation of the question, by petition and otherwise, was a breach of good flith-that the Constitution rests the broad principle of the equality among the members Of the conederacy-that all movements to the contrary destructive to the fundamental principles on which the Union of the States rests, and that all petitions, papers memorials relating in any way to slavery or the abolition thereof, shall be laid on the table without being read, printed or referred'' Immediately, upon the reading thyeof, Mir. BELL moved that the House adjourn, but (having just convened) the House refused and MT. PorTs, of Pennsylva- a. na notorious abolitionist, moved to kill the bill by laying it on the table; which motion, MT. BELL voted with ADAMS, PorTs, SHADE Co.,, to Jag on the ta6k.
 On the 3lst December, l639, a resolution was
 introduced to raise lect committee for abolition petitions, and, on motion to suspend the rule, Mr. BELL voted with ADAMS, SHADE, TRUMAN, SMITH Co.,, for te suspension, but the motion was fortunately lost.
 Abolition petitions accumulated and it became necessary to ake decided action in regard to them. On the 2sth January, l640, w. Cosr JOHNSON, of Md, whig-offered what was afterwards known as the "2lst Rule"-declaring that no petition touching the abolition of slavery in any of the States or Territories or in the District of Colum- bla, should be received by the House entertained in any way whatever. Mir. Johnson said:
 "That the resolutions which had been presented by others the subject too uague to meet his | appreciation, anl therefore worded this to leave no ambiguity. so that when a gentamen voted he c0uld not dece7e s constituents and p0ud clearis defne lis position He called upon those opposed to
 the dbofontsts to vote for it, and to kill the hydra abolition in an instant, in such manner that it could not germinate its species.'
 The question was then taken on the resolution to amend the rule of the House, and Mr. BELL, in company with ADAM, SHADE, TRUMAN SMITH 6 Co.,, roted aqainst the resolution.
 The foregoing is a correct expose of Mir. BELL s record on the subject of slavery up to lS4l, when he left Congress, which shows an almost unbroken chain of votes, in beautiful harmony with the rank est ab0litionists then in the country The sequel will show whether six years retirement from Con- gressonal labors brought about any reformation.
 In 1S4S, Mir. BELL WIS in the United States Sen .ate-a bill came up for the organization of the Territories of California, New Mexico and Oregon. After great difficulty and much excitement a con- mittee of eight, four hom the North and four from the South, was raised to report bill that would harm0nze the conflicting and exciting elements Mir. CLAYTON, of Delaware, was chairman of that committee, which after great labor at last agreed upon bill, which was pr,seIted to the Senate and is known as the Claytoncompromise bill. By it all questions of rghttul Jurisdiction were given to the territorial counsel; but without the power to legislate on the subject of slavery, and ''vestng the right to introduce prohibit slavery in the territories IN THE CONSTITUTION, tte same should be erpounded by the judges with right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States.'' Many amendments were introduce to this bill, and it was on the consideration of it, that was had the memorable session whid, lasted twenty two hours--at last the vote taken on the question, "shall the bill be cngrossed and read the third time" It was decided in the affirmative by thirty three ayes to twenty two noes-Mr. BELL voting in company with CoRwIN, HALE. HAm1IN X Co.,, in the negatioc [See Journal page 503.l
 During the debate, pending shc passage of this bill MT. CLAYTON said "he tit leaoes the entire question which IS in dispute Q the Judiciary-
 There IS no great principle sacrificed. ANY MAN WHO DESIRES DiseoRD WILL lpPosE THE BILL; but he who does not desire to di3ract the country by question merely political wll,e able by voting for this bill to refer the whole mater to the judi ciary."
 The bill was satisfactory to tn, entire South, because it proposed to have the constitutional questions involved decided by the Supreme Court, and the South neuer did, does sie no,c ask for anything but what she is cIcarly e,itied to under the Constitution. Even that great southern states man CALHOUN was satisfied with theorovslons of the bill. He said in reply to the abolition argu- ment that "the Constitution did not apply to the Terrtories:''
 'Sir, there are some questions that dd not admit of heightened discussion. This is one If tbem-
 The mere statement is sufficient to cary convic- ton with it, and am rejoiced to hear gehlemen ac knowledge, by implication, if not by morethan that
 that the extension of the Constitution of he United States to the Territories would be shidd to the South, upon the questions in controversybetween us and them. hold it to be the most important concession. It narrows the ground of controversy between us. We then cannot be deprvd of our equal participation in the Territories, without be- | ing deprived of the advantages and right which the Constitution gives us.''
 Yet MT. BELL, though southerner, was opposed to conceding to the South, Gny dcknopledgsnt of her eQual right to participate and enjoy he ct,unon territory, but by his vote declared, that the potect- ing @gis of the Constitution did not exted to these territories-and yet his advocates claim that he is the only man upon whom the South can de- | pend for her equal tights under the Constitution | The principles of that bill have been triumphatly sustained by the Supreme Court of the Unted States, and yet the opinions of MT. Bell are in 1 changed.
 | Notwithstanding the bill passed the Senateit | was defeated in the House. the entire black replA- lcan abolition free soil vote, being cast against l. In lieu of 1t the House passed bill for the tern | torial government of Oregon, containing the WIh MOT PRovIso, and when it came to the Senate Mi | BELL ADVOCATED ITS PASSAGE, but when the vot was taken he voted against it, on account, as h. said at the time, 'of the feelings of the friends loa
 chom he acas associated" Congressional Globe
 lst session, 3Oth Cong. pages l074-5.l
 | But the bill passed and Mr. BELL afterwards, il speechat Murfreesboro, in favor of Gen. TAyLoI wherein he reviewed his course upon the Oregon bill said that he was not willing 10 defeat that bil by any direct vote, or movement on his part. H therefore voted against the proposition for post ponement. He ,oas glad the tiH had passed, as h. believed it's defeat ,nouid hare done mischief at M North" He did not feel called upon to vote for it though he scas not clearly certain fhdf Congress ha
 not the po,otr to dispose of the uhole subject'' Here Mir. BELL, co-operated with the abolition ists upon question of vital interest to the South and ADVOCATED THE ADOPTION oY.rHE WILMor PRo yrco ubicb roac tn tho f,,ll axto,,t tofu urb,.