Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-02-11

posed 10 the interference With slavery in the pros
eeutiOn OF the war. The first OF June con Z
veution Of which the gentleman was member.
disclaimed all intention Of interfering with slav
cry, aud men of all parties were invited 10 JOIN
them in that platform. The 9Th Of January con
ventiOn was explicit on that subject. How can
men now say or assume that the people of lnd
ana would favor such measure as that before
Congress, 20 arm $50 600 negroes and make them
the equals of our sons and brothers in the field.
De contended that the speeches and writings OF
the leaders of the Republican party all tended to
establish negro equality. He spoke plainly Mr..
Cobb dwelt at some length and with great force
on this branch of the subject
Dir. Browne, of Randolph. would not speak 10
the amendment. rs he did not wish 10 be confined
in his remarks TO il. It did not signify TO him
what the people intended to say. he would speak
to the main question when il came before the
Senate.
Mr.. March: In times of peace he was opposed
TO all political interference with slavery. III the
South would lay down their arms and come back,
he would receive them a erring sisters, and give
them all proper guarantees for their rights IN the
future But IN state of war he was for striking
home through slave property as well as through
any other kind of property. he denied that the
Republican party declared in their Convention
that they were not in favor OF interfering with
slavery. They declared that they were IN favor
Of the war TO restore the States with all their
original rights unimpaired. He did not desire to
prosecute the war for the purpose OF ahOlishlng
slavery, and neither did the Administration.
Mr. Wolfe: The gentleman has been striving
to pick flaw in the resolution, and with all his
zeal he has only found one in the second line,
that the people of Indiana opposed to inter
fering with slavery. He had no doubt that three
fourths of the people of Indiana were so opposed
The Democratic party always had been of that
opinion, and a large portion of the Republican
party still adhered 10 the declaration OF Mr. Lin
coln-that he had not the desire or the consttu-
tional right to interfere with slavery. lie did
not believe that the mass of that party had be-
come speedily Abolltionized. He did not believe
that any considerable portion OF the people OF
Indiana were in favor of a violation OF the Con
stituton
Mr. Brown, of Wells, moved that the amend
ment be laid on the table The yeas and nays
being demanded, the following the result:
YEAs-Messrs Bradley, Brown of Wells. Cobb,
Corbin, Davis OF Cass Douglass Dunning Fer
guson. Finch. Fuller, Calf, Clifford, Graves, Hart
ley, Hoaglaud. Hord, Jenkins, Johnson McClurg,
Moore Ray, Shields, Williams, Wilson. and
Wolfe-25
NAYs-MeSsrs Bearss, Beeson. Berry, Blair,
Browne of Randolph, Campbell, Claypool. Cul
yer, Davis of Parke, Dickinson. Grub, March,
Meett, Murray, New, Plelk, Reed, White, and
Wright-l9
ton by adding the words land that they use their
influence in favor of the passage of any and all
measures looking TO the vigorous prosecution of
the war for the maintenance of the Union, the
enforcement of the laws, and the suppression OF
the rebellion
Mr. Raw owed TO amend the amendment by
adding land with the distinct understanding that
the war shall be prosecuted only for the purpose
of crushing out rebellion. restoring the Union
ufain no npstit no lau
and securing American liberty and not for any
sectional, political, or anti slavery purpose"
Mr. Claypool accepted the amendment
Mr.. Wolfe moved TO further amend by adding
"and provided that it shall be the duty of the
President to Immediately withdraw his Enamel
patton PrOcla nation
Mr.. March contended that the amendment OF
Mr. Wolfe was not german to the question. The
Joint Resolution instructs Senator'S to vote on a
certain question. and this advises the President
TO 10 "A certain act.
The President Mr. Johnson in the Chair de-
cded the amendment in order.
Mr.. New moved to lay the amendment Of Mr..
Wolfe on'the table Lost--ayes Is; nays "a
The question on the adoption of Mr. Wolfe's
amendment was then put and it was adopted by
votes of ayes ~; nays Is.
Mr.. March was Ia favor OF portion Of the
amendment and opposed to another portion. He
deprecated the discussion OF matters such as these
as such discussions embarrassed the Administra
ton in the prosecution of the As well
might regiments discuss the orders of a comnan
der.
Mr.. Dunning (Mr. Johnson in the Chair was
in hopes that these several amendments would
prove common ground, where we could all
stand. He regretted To hear the gentleman
from Delaware oppose il. and For the reasons
given. Who was it that raised the issues?-not
the Democratic party, but the President himself,
the chief of the gentlemans own party He had
made the strongest argument ever made against
the foolish proclamation, and vet in a few DAYS
after he gives notice that he would issue il, and
after large portion of the people had expressed
themselves against il, he issues his proca nation.
He built the windmill the gentleman speaks of.
His acts were open to criticism, aud lie should
be compelled to withdraw his foolish procama-
ton. That "bull against the comet made a
unit of the people of the South and divided the
people of the North It, effect was wicked. 1t
crushed out every particle of Union sentiment in
the South. Mr.. Dunning ably and eoquently
advocated the passage of the resolution Mr..
Dunnlng was subject 10 Il cross tire of questions,
and replied to them with candor. He favored
the amendment, and most heartily favored the
resolution amended.
Mr.. Browne. of Randolph, assumed as a legal
proposition that the proclamation of the 22l
September and the lst of January did not inter
cry in the States where il existed. He argued
this proposition If the proclamation struck
down the system, il WAS uncons tltutional, and
should not receive the support of the people;
but the individual relation of master and slave
different, and that alone was affected by the
proclamation. The proclamation only viewed
the re'ati "a b tween The disloval master and his
sl,te and Nhen the States returned they would
rc'uia with all their risii, nuimis,iled
VI Shields: II DeS the eeutlem IN contend that
tie Lave oI The loyal master J. not affected by
the proclamation in the States covered by itl
NJ Browne, of Randolph: II does not affect
the >YStem
striking down the tenure and striking out the
property held under that teuuieg
Mr. Browne. OF Randolph: |. Won strike down
the tenure. You deprive The party of all power to
acquire properly in the future This was the
difference. He CONTINUED his argument upon the
legal point, aud then mon tie policy of the
me sure. bringing forw .rl the argument hereto
fore Freely used by The press. and speakers
OF the Republican party.
Mr. C0bb asked the Senator if the proclim
tou d.d hot strike the loyal -laveholaer! The
conti-cation act and the article of war under it
already had forfeited their right TO property in
slaves
Mr. Shields: While the gentleman is answer
ing viii he tell us how the proclamation would
deprive the rebellion OF support when the Presi-
dent admonshcd the slaves TO remain and work
for their masters What difference to us in the
light OF supplies 10 the rebellion, whether the
slave worked for wages or for food and clothingr
Mr.. Browne, of Randolph, did not profess 10