The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1861-03-12
UNITED STATES SENlTE..-SPECnhSESSlOy.

sit is understood that the State of Texas has s
ceded from the Union, and is no longer of IL
United States; therefore be it Resolved, That she
not entitled to be represented in this bod
-Mr. FOSTER said be had very fe
words to utter, both as to the resolution and i
substitute, and, therefore, would enter into ar
lengthy discussion. 1t was proper he should sta
that he offered the resOlu tiun on his respens
bilitv and without consulting with his polite
friends. He had presented it stripped of all part
considerations, as far as it possible to do St
that it might be acted on upon its naked mer its.
seat in this chamber held fuundato
higher than party grounds, and hence be truSte
the Senate would rise above all such cor
sideratons The Constitution provides fo
the qualification and the manner of the elet
tl0n OF Senators; and he read from tha
instrument the words upon this subject 1t wa
not on the ground that the Senator from Texa
was foreignborn that he was liable to objection
1t was to be supposed that be native-borr
and that he was duly elected member of this bod
And in saying that he was foreigner, it was no
to be supposed that he meant that be was born ou
OF the jurisdiction of this country. 1t howeve
seemed to him, Mr.. Foster,) that the Senate owe
it to itself not to allow a seat mere to one VIII
avowed that he was a foreigner and owed n,
| allegiance to the country to which he belonged
| but to foreign government; and if tha
| government happen to take up arm,
against this government, seizes its property, an,
expels from its territory the troops of the United
States by force, it became very serious question
! Was it consistent to allow circumstance
| longer to hold a seat here? He repeated that hC
| had no personal feeling on the subject. He couIC
say with great propriey, far as his personal re
| lstions with the Senator from Texas were con-
| cerned, that they were entirely kind and friend
! ". Tue substitute of the Sena tor from
! North Carolina assumes that Texas has the
right to secede, and it was logical conclusion tha
in such event she had right to seats here. In
this be differed from the Senator. He did no
believe that any State had the right or power under
the Constitution to secede take itself out of the
| IInin Of fho hsob
America. He differed widely and radically from
such theories, 1t was altogether monstrous that
this government, one OF power and authority,
could thus be dissolved. Argument, therefore,
was unnecessary with those who held to
a different opinion. Two might as well under
take to reason in a foreign language which one
understood and the other did not. That no such
thing as secession was known to the Constitution,
was too plain to argue or to admit of doubt. After
brief argume mt on this point he said whether Texas
has seeded he was not intormed-he meant by
vote OF the people, some body representing them.
lie should hold the Senator entitled to his seat for
all that, on sound constitutional ground. Could
that State by Withdrawing from the Union with
draw from this body? mol He is entitled to his
seat according to the forms of the Constitution and
the authority of his State, and the State has no
power legally or c0nstitutionally to withdraw him
from this body during the term for which he was
elected. He did not think the substitute met the
question. Heidi not know what right the Senator
Mr. Clingman, had to say that Texas has seeded
from the confederacy of the States and no longer
belongs to the United States. But even if there
were official notice it would be a nuty. If State
has Withdrawn and given the Senate even official
notice, what right had they to say she should be
longer entitled to representatives They were
clothed with no such authority MIR. CLING
MAN said he thought the Senator from
Connecticut had made good argument
against his own resolution. If they were to credit
the newspapers, Texas has called a convention and
passed an ordnance of secession which it is stated
hna bonr fnl
That is the opinion OF the Senator from Texas If
that be true and the act valid, Texas is no longer
one of these States. He took it for granted that
II Texas has seeded she is not entitled to represen
tatlon here. The Senator from Connecticut saws
the act is invalid. Then the Senator from Texas
entitled to his seat unless be said that an erro-
neous opinion disqualified him. In the
opinion OF the Senator from Texas his State
has seeded. The Senator from Connecticut says
no. w as it ever maintained because one Senator
differed from another on a constitutional question:
that that was reason for expelling him? 1t might
be supposed thas the Senate could expel a man who
thought and argued that the moon was made of
green cheese, laughter. and that such a one
should be driven out. But would any gentleman
say he ought to be driven out. Fifteen Senators
have gone out, believing their States have right
to secede. The mother of States and statesmen
Nlrglnia-has always maintained that opinion If
1t is an error for the Senator from Texas to believe
that his State has right to secede, why not expel
the Virginia Senators; and especially, why not ex-
pei those gentlemen who declared it and
have gone away? Why is it that their names are
still called? They have gone away, showing an ut
ter disregard for contrary opinions. But the
Senator says that Texas has taken possession of
some of the public property. Is that a good rea-
son? If so, it applies with more force to other
States than Texas. Why did the Senator from
Connecticut allow the name of Hon. Jefferson Da-
Wis to be called and not move to expel him? Not
only had that gentleman's State seeded but he
had advised arms and forts to be seized, and was at
hAod Of I'D
motion is made to expel him. The Senator
said he deemed it his duty to make the motion to
expe! Mr. Wigfall. Senator after Senator had
made similar avowas and eTen advised their constit
uents to take possession of the defensive works of
the United States. Senator To0mbs declared that
he gave such advice. Why, then, single out the
Senator from Texas. his friend, Mr.. Wigfall had
said that his State has seeded, and, with great
trankness added that. therefore, he regarded him
self foreigner. But this did not afford sufficient
ground for his expulsion. He had pursued the
policy of other retiring Senators by remaining
here, and was awaiting oicia! information--
NJ NJ " CLAkh-he says is foreigner.-Mr.
CLlNGMAM, reSuming-His friend said if they
thought proper to admit and regard him as a
Senator, he did not think proper to withdraw until
he was officially notified that Texas has seeded
The course proposed by the Senator from Connec-
ticut was not the proper one. All they could do
was to say that the Senator from Texas is mistaken
on a constitutional and legal point If Texas has
not seeded be is entitled to his seat here notwith>
standing the opinion he expresses.-Mr. MASON
remarked that the resolution was clearly for the
expulsion of the Senator from Texas, FOR what he
had said this floor. The Constitution enables the
Senate to protect itself and gives power to expel
member provided two-thrds vote for the resolution
But the expulsion of Senator is punative in char.
acter, and the intention ofthe Senator from Con-
necticut is to punish the Senator from Texas for
what he said in debate. The Senator from
Connecticut said what the Senator from Texas had
av0wed was inconsistent with the holding of a seat
NJ thIc Hnn 1ln Ln1 IL
was foreigner, and not citizen of the United
States, but owed allegiance to foreign govern
ment. If the Senator from Connecticut thought
the Senator ought not to occupy seat because he
is not citizen, he ought to move to refer
the subject to committe, so that, il the |
facts warrant, the seat will be declared vacant |
Slr. FOSTER. interposing, asked whether after |
the Senator from Texas bad been duly elected by |
his State, and admitted as member here, they |
could inquire into the legality by which he holds
his seat-a new fact rising which did not exist at
that time.-Mr. MASON said he was very GER
tain If Senator was not entitled to a seat it |
could be vacated whenever the facts which warrant
such course should be disclosed If it be punish
able offence to alege constitutional truth, then |
The resolution may be well founded. For one, he |
Mr.. Mason) recognized no allegiance to
allegiance to this Government
ione 'rhateUer-and here he took his position along
side of the Senator from Texas. Although Vir-
5lnia is constituent of this Government, and he |
IuS VI AcI coSHldtlfts, ue ONcu allegiance 10
Virginia and no else. Did the Senator from
Connecticut resist the doctrine of Constitutional |
aw, and hold that the Government of the United |
States is still sovereign? If he did, God help him.
Laughter.) SO far as the Senator from Texas has
committed offence by saying he owed no
allegiance to this Government he stood by his
ide. He should be unfaithful to Virginia if he did
lot. The old feudal idea of allegiance was the
relation between subject and sovereign-be.
tween the vassal and his lord. Allegiance here is
hat which is due from a citizen to sovereign
oower. He knew of no sovereign except that of
The State. He took it for granted that Connecticut
$ the sSenator's sovereign, and that if he yields
allegiance to this Government he is faithless The
7ote of allegiance in Virginia to be taken by |
all who are admitted to the political powers |
1f the State, is faithfully and truly to support the
Commonwealth. If the Senator from Texas is
0relgner, he is not citizen of the United States
But that is because of the fact not because of the
allegation for the Constitution says that foreigner
shall not have a seat on this floor. The Senator |
from Texas said he believed he was foreigner to |
this Government, because Texas has separated her.
self from it, for the Senator did not then know the
Tact, nor did be know it now, unless he received |
the intelligence last night. The Senator believed
that Texas has seeded, because he knew |
the popular sentiment of the State, and vet, |
because of this declaration the Senator |
rom Connecticut sought his expulsion. The |
Senator and others, and the new President declare
that the ordinance declaring a separation is
1ul, and that the State holds the same relation it
lld Deiore the passage OF the act We (said Mr..
Mason) deny it. Virginia denies it. Six of the |
States, as far as we know, not only deny it but
have acted on it; and not only have confederated,
out have formed government, prepared to sus-
ain itself if this. government shall attempt to
attack it. If the Senator from Connecticut
would say the act was nullity, then he
leld language which he (Mr. Mason) thought,
With great respect to him, is more disre-
pectful, tenfo!d, than the language for which
he Senator says the Senator from Texas
deserves to be expelled. Why? Because, by their