Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1861-03-20
Geographic.
CONGRESSIONAL.
M.snrsarnx. Monday. March IL.

WASHINGTON, Monday, March IL.
SENATE.-The Senate resumed the consid-
Grafton of Mr. Fosters resolution for the expul-
sion Of Senator Wigfall and Clingmans substi
tute.
Mr.. Foster had offered the resolution neither
party or personal question, but had acted in &C
cordaDce with his duty, considering the avowal
of the Senator He differed altogether with Mr..
Clingman, that a State has the right under the
Constitution to 60 cut of the Union. Mr.. Foster
said the Senate owed it to itsefnot to allow a seat
here to one who avowed he was a foreigner, and
owed no allegiance to the country to which he
belonged, but to a foreign Government and if
that Government happened to take up arms
against this Government, and seize its property,
and expels from its territory by force the troops
of the United States, it became very serious
objection, and 1t was inconsistent to allow any
one so circumstanced TO hold a seat here He
had no personal feeling in the matter.
Mr.. Foster then argued against Mr.. Clingman's
substitute, which admits the right of secession,
but no such thing was known to the Constitution,
which was too plain this point to argue, or ad-
NIT of doubt. He held that the Senator was
entitled to a seat on sound constitutional ground,
whether Texas seeded or not. That State, by
Withdrawing from the Union, could not withdraw
him from that body.
Mr.. Clingman replied, that if the accounts
were true Texas had called a Convention and
passed an ordinance of secession, which had been
ratified by the people, and if the act was voted,
Texas was no longer one of the States, and he
took it for granted, if Texas seeded she is not
entitled to a representation here. The Senator
from Texas believes his State has seeded. The
Senator from Connecticut says the act of seces-
sion is invalid. Then the Senator from Texas
is entitled to a seat, unless erroneous opinion
disqualifes him.
Was it ever maintained that because one Sena-
tor differed from another on a constitutional
question that that was a reason for expeliing hmI
If it is an error for the Senator from Texas to
believe that his State has right to secede why
not expel the Virginia Senators who held the
same opinions, and especially why not those who
declared it and have gone away? No motion is
made to expel JEFF. Davis, who is at the head of
foreign republic, and has advised the seizure of
arms and forts. He (Clingman) did not think
the avowal of Wigfall sufficient ground for his
expulsion.
He continued at some length arguing that the
course of the Senator from Connecticut was not
proper one
Mr.. Mason contended that the resolution was
one of expulsion for what the Senator from Texas
said this floor; and he said if Mr.. Foster
thought that Mr.. Wigfall ought not to occupy
his selt because he was not citizen, he ought to
move to refer the subject to a committee, so that,
if facts warrant, the seat is to be declared vacant
Mr.. Foster asked whether, after the Senator
from Texas had been duly elected by his State,
and admitted as member here they could in
qure into the legality by which he holds his seat
new fact arising which did not exist at that
time
Mr.. Mason was very certain if the Senator was
entitled to a seat it could be vacated whenever
the fact warranting such course it should be dis
closed. He defended the course of Mr.. Wigfall,
and said if it be a punishable offense to alege a
constitutional truth that the resolution may be
well fonded For one he (Mason) recognized
no allegiance to this government, none whatever,
and here took his position alongside the Senator
from Texas. He owed allegiance to Virginia and
no one else. Did the Senator from Connecticut
resist the doctrine of constitutional law and hold
the Government of the United States sovereign? if
he did God help him. So tar as the Senator from
Texas has committed an offense by saying he
owed allegiance to this Governments he stood by
his side and should be unfaithful to Virginia if he
did not
Allegiance here is that which is due from one
citizen to a sovereign power, and he knew no
sovereign except the State He denied that the
act of separation was nullity and said that only
Virginia had denied it but six States denied
such doctrine and have formed Government,
and is prepared to sustain itselfif attacked. Mr.
Hunter considered the resolution as one of cen
sure for the mere expression of opinion. The
Senator from Texas having done nothing more
than declare his belief in secession, and continued
at length, advocating State rights.
The Senate went into executive session and
then adjourned.
WASHINGTON, Tuesday, March H.
SENATE.-The Senate took up Fosters reso-
luton for the expulsion of Wigfal, when on mo-
ton of Mr.. Simmons it, together with Clingman's
substitute, was referred to the Judiciary Com
mittee.
Mr. Trumbull, from the Judiciary Committee,
to whom was referred Mr.. Mason's resolution
about Messrs. Carlton and SanbOm, reported
back the resolution with a recommendation that
it be postponed till the third Monday in Deem
Der, which was agreed to. The committee deem
it premature to order payment at this time
The Senate went into executive session and
adjourned
WASHINGTON, Wednesday, March l3.
SENATE.-Mr. Douglas offered resolution
calling on the Secretary of War for information
as to the forts in the seeding States and if it is
necessary to reoccupy the same, what force will
be necessary for the purpose, etc.
Messrs. Wilson and Mason Directing, the reso-
luton lies over
Mr.. Fessenden offered resolution directing the
Secretary of the Senate to strike from the roll of
the Senate the names of Senators from the seced
ing States, who have declared they are no longer
members of the Senate.
The Senate went into executive session, and af
tarvv rd oIi oil