The national Republican., 1861-03-12
EXTRA SESSION OF THE SENATE.
Mondav. March IL. 1851.

LuOWUuy, IuUTCH 1 1, 1901.
The Senate resumed the liberation of tho
following resolution, introduced last Friday, by
Mr.. Foster:
"Whereas the Hon. L. 7. wighll, now Sen.
ator Of the United States from the State Of
Texas, has declared in debate that he is for.
egner, that he owes no allegiance to this Gov.
ernment, but that he belongs to and owes ale
gience to another and foreign State and Govern
ment therefore,
"Resolced, That the said L. T. Wigrall be,
and he hereby is, expelled from this body"
Mr.. Clingman had offered the following as q
substitute:
Strike out all after the word Whereas" and
insert at is understood that the State Of
Texas has seeded from the Union, and is no
longer one of the United States; therefore,
" "Reso'red, That she is not entitled to be rep.
resented in this body"
Mr.. Foster said he offered his resolution with.
out consultation with his party friends, and on
his own responsibility. He trusted II would be
considered on its naked merits nor had he
any personal feelings in the matter, for, so far
as his intercourse with the Senator from Texas
was concerned it was Of the most friendly char.
acter He had but performed what he con.
ceived to be q public duty. The Constitution
provides the qualifications and the manner of
election Of Senators. No one supposed the
Senator was not properly elected, and no one
supposed that he was born out of the jurisdic.
ton of this country. But the Senator had de.
clared here that he was foreigner, and owed
no allegiance to this, but a foreign Govern.
ment, which had seized the public property, and
expelled troops Of the United States by force
from its territory. This rendered the matter
very serious. He then argued against the doc.
tr,p pc Ho ha1; Co.
had the right or power, under the Constitution,
to secede and take itself out Of the Union. 1t
is altogether monstrous. He did not know by
what principle the Senator from North Carolina
could say Texas has q right to secede from the
Confederacy Of States, and no longer belong
TO the United States. II the Senate had official
notice Of such action, secession would be q
nullity.
Mr.. Clingman thought the Senator had made
bad argument against his own resolution. II
they were to credit the newspapers, Texas has
seeded. She called a Convention, which passed
an ordinance Of secession, which the people, it
is said, have ratified by large vote. That is
the opinion Of the Senator from Texas. If this
is true, and the act Valid Texas is no longer
one Of the States. He took it for granted, if
Texas has seeded, she is not entitled to repre-.
sentation here. The Senator from Connecticut
says the act of secession is invalid. Then, the
Senator from Texas is entitled to his seat unless
you say his erroneous opinion disquali6es him.
The opinion of the Senator is, that Texas has Sc
ceded. The Senator from Connecticut says not
Now, was it ever maintained, because Sena-
tor differed from another on constitutional
question, that that is q reason for expelling
himP Why not, on the same principle, pro.
coed against the Senators who have retired be-
IN, fha,r tata hnr ID L..
the Senator from Connecticut allow the name
of Jefferson Davis to be called2 He is the
head Of the Southern Confederacy-a foreign
republic. No motion had been made to expel
him. Why is the Senator from Texas singled
out? All the Senate could do was to say that
the Benator from Texas is mistaken on con.
stitutional and legal point but this was no
reason for expelling him. If Texas has not
seeded he is still entitled to his seat here, not.
the opinion he expresses.
Mr.. Mason remarked, that the resolution
called for the expulsion Of the Senator from
Texas for what the latter had said on this floor.
So the cause for expulsion is for what the Sen.
ator said. The Constitution enables the Senate
to protect itself, by comforting the power to
expel member for disorderly conduct, pro.
vided there be q two.thirds vote for the resou.
tion. But this proposition to expel the Sem
ator is punitive, and for what he said in de.
bate. If it be punishable offence to allege
a constitutional truth, then the resolution may
be well founded. AS for himself, he (Mr. Ma
son) owned he recognised no allegiance to this
Government. He recognised and acknowledg.
ed no allegiance to the Government-none
whatever. And here he took his position along.
his allegiance to Virginia. He knew of no
Gny buf Sf,to Ha 4,
granted Connecticut is the Senator's Mr.. Eos.
ter's sovereign; and if he yields allegiance to
this Government, he is faithess to her. They
owed, however, obedience to the laws and to
The Constitution. The Senator from Connecti-
cut, and others, with the new President, de.
rlares the act for the separation of State is
null, and that the State holds the same relation
hat it did before. We deny it. Virginia denies
t. Six of these States, as far as we know, not
only deny it, but have acted on this belief, and
not only separated, but have confederated, and
nave formed a Government prepared to sustain
Itself, If the Federal Government attempts to
attack it. l am, he continued, sworn to sup.
port the Constitution, not the Government.
Mr.. Hunter regarded the resolution as in.
ended to vote censure for a mere expression
'f opinion-to punish man who may differ
rom the majority. Ifthey could punish him
or this, they might punish another for defend
ng slavery. He maintained that the Senator
rom Texas had expressed no opinion that was
lot expressed by all the seeding States. II
le should be expelled, the other Senators who
ave retired should, On the same principle, be
expelled also. He further argued against the
dopton of the resolution.
Without defnitive action thereon, the Sen.
te went into Executive session, and q short
ime thereafter adjourned.
AEEATRQ I'M ruApT rcTnN