Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1860-05-23
CONGRESS.
IRrpoRreD FOR THE ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE
Senate, Tuesday May %.


Senate, Tuesday May %.
Mr.. Fessenden, of Maine, called up the de-
ficiency appropriation bill as returned from
the House.
The latter had stricken out the provision
for paying the widow of Lewis I. Linn, ar
rears of mileage, and the Senate, after some
debate, receded from it's amendment.
Mr.. Thompson, of n j. introduced joint
resolution for the restoration of Augustus 5.
Baldwin to the active list, as Lieutenant in
the Navy.
Mr.. Gwin, of Cal, introduced bill to grant
alternate sections of land to California for
Railroad purposes.
On motion of Mr. Pearce, of Nd, the Sen
ate insisted on its amendments to the Consul
lar and Diplomatic appropriation bill, and
committee Of conference was ordered to con-
fer with Il similar committee on the part OF
the House
On motion Mr. Davis's Territorial resolu-
tons were again taken up.
Mr.. Hale, of n H., resumed his remarks.
He corrected the statement made by Mr..
Lane and Mr.. Pugh yesterday, in regard to
the action of Indiana on the introduction OF
slaves. He contcnded that Indiana did pc
ttion for the suppression of the law Prohlb-
iting slavery for ten years, and Congress re-
fused it, Slaves were taken IN afterwards
in violation OF the law, but the Courts deci-
ded the ordinance of 1857 binding and all
slaves by virtue of it were emancipased. 1t
was useless, therefore, to deny that the or
dinance Of 1877 was regarded as legal and
binding.
He referred to the interference of the Su-
prcme Court in political questions and said
in doing so it hurt nobody, but damaged its
own reputation. He hooted at the idea that
the bred Scott decision disposed of the rights
and interests of fifteen States Of the Union,
who were not a party to the suit. The
claim was perfectly monstrous. No court
and no caucus could settle this question,
which was the great question OF the age
Wherever the friends of freedom had con-
tended for the right, this question had been
argued and adjudcated. The founders of
the government had established anti-slavery
principles, and the Republican party had
determined to maintain them.
Mr.. Pugh said the ordinance of 1887 was
never popular in the North West. The Of
| tcers appointed under it ruled that section
with a rod of iron. The ordinance of 'S7 was
never legally passed. Slaves were held in
all that Territory in spite of the ordinance.
| Illinois as well rs Indiana protested against
tie prohibition Of slavery.
Mr.. Lane, also, addressed the Senate
maintaining the same views.
| Mr.. Benjamin. of La, commented with
much severity upon the speech of Mr. Doug
las. lie declared that Mr.. Douglas had al
| A ho
| had agreed that when the Court pronounced
! his doctrine incorrect, he would abandon it.
| The Court had decided the question: and
Mr.. Douglas did not abandon the doctrine as
he promised He devoted his anima,lver-
sions exclusively to the course of Judge
| Douglas since the rendition Of the bred
| Scott decision. He declared that Judge
| Douglas and his friends and those who disa-
| greed with them had in 1854 and 1886 agreed
| to leave the question Of what power Con-
gress could confer upon IL Territorial legisla-
ture to the decision of the Courts. That deci-
sion had been given Mr. Douglas had bro
ken the bond, and did not abide by that de-
cision.
lie continued vehemently attacking Mr..
Douglas, alleging that he had taken the very
argum ents Of Mr.. Lincoln on the illinois
stump, and incorporated them into his Har
per article, as arguments against the Demo
cratic party.
llecoscd by saying that his charge against
Mr. Douglas WAS that having agreed that
the decision of the question should be left to
the supreme court, and that that decision
should bind the party, he went home and in
the excitement of local canvass, his knees
la, inl
solemn engagements with the party. lie
had received his reward, an ignoble one when
gained by such means; but he had lost the
prize he most coverted. 1t had slipped from
his grasp because he did not fight upon prin-
ciple. His opponent in that canvass who
stood upon principle and was defeated, was
now honored by his party with the highest
position in its gilt, whilst Mr.. Douglas ADAM
doned by his party-was fallen star.
He could, he said, conclude his speech in
no better words than those of Mr.. Douglas,
when after attacking every body in the
chamber, he said 1.-The Senate will bear me
witness that all have said has been in reply
TO attacks upon me, and if shall ever raise
my voice again it will be in selfdetence"
Mr.. Pugh, Of OHIO, replied with much
vigor He thanked the Senator from Louisi-
ana for his lucid dem onstration that the
Cincinnati platform and Kansas Nebraska
Bill were not liable to misconstruction. He
denied that Mr.. Douglas and his associates
had refused to abide by his agreement to al
low the Supreme Court to settle the Judicial
question involved in that bill and platform
No such decision had been given in the
bred Scott case. The question agreed to be
submitted, was not before the Court in that
case. 1t was indeed, strange to compel
those who had agreed to abide by one decl-
sion, upo!, one question, in one case, to abide
by another decision, on another question, in
another case lie could but view it as an
experiment upon the manhood of the North
ern Democracy. lie continued at much
length, denying the correctness of the state
ments, as to the manner in which majority
was obtained in the Charleston Convention,
and going at length into the inter-party diff
tculties Of the Democracy. He declared
that the Richmond Convention was the con-
vention OF a new party, and that the seats
OF the seeding delegates in the Baltimore
adjourned Convention were vacated.
MesSrs. Davis, Rice, Wigfall and others
occasionally interrupted Mr.. Pugh to correct
L., l., l..