The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1861-03-13
Senator Mason OH Allegiance 10 the Federal
Government.

During the debate in the Senate Monday
| on the Wisftll Expulsion resolution
Mr. Mason said he was very certain. if 2
Senator was not entitled to IA seat it could bt
vacated whenever the facts. which warran
such a course, should be disclosed II itabe n
punishable offence 10 aIlege constitute
truth, then the resolution may be we'll found
ed. For one, he (Mr Mason} recognized ma
allegiance TO this Government
He recognized and ackno VI lpdged no allegi-
ance TO this Government. nome ,chntertr and
here he took his position alongside the Sena-
tor from Texas; although Virginia is n con.
stituent OF this Government, and he one OF
ner representatives, he owed allegiance to
Virginia and no one else. Did the Senator
from Connecticut resist the doctrine of con
stitutional law, and hold that the United
states * still sovereign If he did God helm
him. ILaU ghter
so far as the Senator from Texas has com
n.itted an offence by saying he owed no ale
glance to this Government, he stood by his
side He should he unfaithful to Virginia if
he did not. The old feudal idea of allegiance
was the rela ton between a subject and a SOW
ereign: between the vassal and his lord AL
legiance here is that which is due from "a cit
zen TO sovereign power He knew of no
sovereign except that of the State. He took
it for granted that Connection is the Sena-
tors sovereign, and that if he yields allegi-
ance TO this Government he is faithless
The oath of allegiance in virginia to be
taken by all who are admitted 10 the political
powers of the State, is faithfully and truly to
support the Commonwealth. If the Senator
from Texas is a foreigner he is not "A citizen of
the United States But that is because of the
fact, not because of the allega tion, for the
Constitution says that foreigner shall not
have 4 seat on this floor. The Senator from
Texas said he believed he was a foreigner to
this Government because Texas has separa ted
herself from it, for the Senator did not then
know the fact, nor did he know ii now unless
he received the intelligence last night. The
Senator believed that Texas has seeded be-
cause he knew the popular sentiment OF the
State, and yet. because of this dec ration the
Senator from Connecticut sought his expu!-
sion.
The Senators and others, and the new Presi-
dent, declare that the ordinance dec ia ring n
separation is null, and that the State holds
the same relation IT did before the passage OF
the act: he (said Mr. Mason denied it, Eir-
ginia denies it. Six of the States as far a they
knew, not only denied il but have &C ted on it :;
and not only have confederated, but have
formed Il Government prepared 10 sustain it.
self if this Government shall attempt to attack
IL. If the Senator from Connecticut would say
the act was nullity, then he held language
which he Mr.. Masonj thought, with great re-
spect 10 him, Is more disrespectiul, tentoid
than the language for which the Sena tor sx1k
the Senator from Texas deserves 10 be expelf-
ed. Why? Because by their language five
millions OF people and seven sovereign States
are IN ms direction.
They declare the acts of secession MULTI ties
Although these States seize what they call
pubic property, yet, acknowledging all this,
they take no means To recover it. In not act
ing upon the information, they are more rep
rehensibie than the Senator from Texas
How could he owe allegiance to this Govern
ment? Then he must obey the orders of this
Government in preference to those of his own
State. He was sworn TO support the Consti-
tuition not the Government.