New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1866-03-10
FROM WASHINGTON.
Continued from First Page.

conceded Dy the States suOuIu DC thJ"ltu u' tHe
citizens in equality That was the effect OF the rs sec
,i,n II neither regulated conferred rights, civil or
political but simply operated as aresrant on theStates
lie might be met by the statement mat IL was com.
etent for States TO provide that certain persons should
not be able TO testify or 70 sit on iuries, or 10 hod
Office lie granted that Thai right would SUI De held
AFTER this hi was passed But he submitted that 1t was
not competent for State to provide that the person
whom the United States has made citizen shall not
rnov the essential rights OF citizenship That PROPOSE
ZION was not only sound but II was Vndlcaeu ny tne
most extreme State rights inriSts and statesmen IN
GLIDING Calhoun. who said that oltizenshp cohieiteu
al least the right Of protection and that along with that
went the right 10 the means for the protecAon OF
citiz snship. uv, 49,
The five minutes allowed 10 MI. SheHapdrgr hele
Mr. WILSON dowa) closed the argument in advocacy
OF the bill He sand 1 had hoped, Mr. Speaker to be
able 10 answer on this occasion some OF the positions
taken YESTERDAY by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Delano) but his remarks are not contained IN The
GIg6 tins morning and lest should misilnierpret MN
Ills most remarkable Saterirhts speech This bill has
met with opposition iu both Houses on the same ground
that in time gone by before this land vas drenehed
in blood il urged by those who controlled IL dest
MES of the South aud by those in the North who adj
bered to their fortunes for the purpose Of riveng the
chains of Slavery and converting this Republic into
great slave nation The same arguments urged against
this bill in both houses but cOunterpaTs OF tue ar
gument used in opposition to the authority which the
Government sought to exercise in controlling the
spread and preventing the perpetuation OF slavery
But have not time to 60 over TINS general GROUND,
aud shall therefore confne myself 10 the points that
have been made to-day by the gentleman from ONO
(Mr Bngham) i do not intend TO be driven or nj.
lured from the position which took gt the opening OF
this discussion In justification OF this bill 10y any Of me
glittering generalitleS that have been thrown
Into the discussion. affirmed on that coca
sion and l reaffrm it here to-day. that citizens
OF tie United States such are emitted to certain
rights and stand here TO affirm that being entitled 10
those rights il is the duty Of the government 70 pro-
.ect them in those rights. The citizen is entitled 10
liberty and the right Of property The gentleman from
Ohio Air Bingham tells us that for the protection o.
those rights the citizen must depend on the hones! OF
shnu al Ssofp
ernen cannot inte pose Its strong rgbt arm 70 protect
the citizen in life in liberty and the possession OF prop
erty il the honest purpose OF the State should be ex-
erted in opposition to those rights. IL other words II
States in that honesty o. purpose mani.steu .! lnem
dpe process Of law of life, liberty, or property, the
General Government which could draw the citizen by
the strong bond of allegiance from his hreside
10 the le-feld. has no power 10 intervene
10 set aside that State law and give The citizens proec
ton In the courts Of the United States; but that
al the mercy Of the States lie all the rights OF
the citizens Of the United States; that little Dele
ware has hand stronger than the United States; that
revOlted South Carolina put under LOCK and Key All
the great fundamental rights belonging TO the citizens
and that must be dumb, aud legislative power
cannot be exercised and courts must be closed 10 inc
appeal Of the citizen That is the doctrine when TINS
body representing great free people just ron
terrible for the maintenance OF ci'H liberty, 10
asked TO adopt here to-day as It's deliberate judgment
He (Mr WILSON, found in the bill OF rights which the
gentleman (Mr Bngham) desired to have enforced,
provision that no person cond be deprived OF life ber
Is or property without due process OF law lie under
Stood that these things constituted the ciVh
rights belonging TO the cltzeas IN connection
with those that were necessary for the protection and
maintenance Of the rights thus specifically named and
not bevond them They not without light sto the
duty OF the General Government in reference 10 the
projection Of those rights In the case OF Prgg against
the Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania, yter? the de
cslon was made in behalf OF Slavery ne found the doc
trnes lail down which were perfectly applicable 70 this
ease. Suppose State should Intervene and deprive
citizen without due nrccess OF law Of his right 10 NE
IlDeIIy an property as had been the case an lnus
60 cfrfi mast
Gomez From tue source that was interfering with
the righti Not at all From whence them FROM the
Government Of the United States, whose duty II was
70 project the citizen in the enjoyment OF those
rights Referring 10 the amendment offered by Mr..
Bingham MI Wilson declared that he wanted
10 mere complete indication Of the power OF Congress 70
pass this bill reported than the Offering OF that
amendment He would teke that amendment and the
gentcmaus argument IN support OF 1t ana apply them
as arguments ia support Of the bill reported from the
Judiciary Committee. The whole difference between
item was this that instead Of protecting tie citizens
bv criminal process against those who wonld interfere
with his rights the gentlemans proposition WOMB re-
NIT the citizen to a civil suit for damages lie repu
dated that doctrine and asserted 1t to be the dpty OF
tie Government Of the united states 70 provide 10Y inc
-rntectOn Of the citizen and TO py the cost attendant
upon IT, He expected through some OF the votes taken
on this mcisare 10 have the indorenent OF most u not
ali OF the members Of tbs House for 80 sss.ra nrne
PIES involved 10 the bill Their Democratic
friends of course would vote for the gentlennn's
(Bingham') amendment. So would those who agreed
with the gentleman from Ohio who spoke Yesterday
.lAlr. Deland). They would also have the gentleman
from New-York (Mr. Raymond voting IN favor OF in
siruetiOns which. would compel the Judiciary Commit.
Zee 10 report back bill inyoying the intricate prn-
clpe Of the second section Of the bill TO which be oh
sected yesterdays so that every vote IN favor OF those
Instructions w0ald be vote IN favor OF the principles
involved in the bill and although IL might result in the
defeat Of what he regarded most important egslG-
ton he should at least have tie consolation O knowing
that this intelligent house bat come 10 the conclusion
which the Judiciary Committee had arrived at tnat all
of those rights belonged 10 the citizen and that be
should be protected in them, the only difference
being he insisted. that the protection should be
extended AT tie cost of the Government, while the
eentlcmaas DIV. Bingham's) amendment would cempe
roe citizen 10 seek biz remedy at BIS own cost As 70
the remainder of the bill which the gentleman from
Ohio proposed to strike out, there was Democratic
precedent for II 10 the PROVISIONS oil the fugitive Slave
law lie not prepared 20 cast vote today which
would declare that an the powers exercised by this
Government In former days IN bcha ~ Slavery should
not now be exercised III behalf Of bai y the freedom
OF the citizen, and bis ample protection IN al the funda
mental rights belonging 10 hin.
Mr. RIsGHAM-I withdraw my INSTRUCTIONS, as tho
gentleman seems to take advantage and TO mistake IT,
The SPEAkEE-The House is operating under the
previous question and the amendment cannot be with
drawn unless by unanimous consent.
Mr. ELDEIDGE moved to lay the hole subject on the
table; which was negatyed-Ieas, -; Nays, lloi no
Republican member voting yea
Tie question next taken on Mr.. Bnghsms
amendment recomWit with instructions and ii was
reiected-Yess 81: Nays. III.
The question REQUIRED on Mr. Wilson's motion 10 re.
commit the bill TO the judiciary Committee.
Mr.. Wusos asked 10 withdraw the motion. but the
rules prevented IT, He stated however that he did not
want the bill reeOmmitted
The vote was taken and the bill recommitted by
a vote Of q yeas against 10 rays, a. follows
YEAs-Messrs Ancons, Anderson Baker Bingham, Blow,
Boyer Brooks, BucLland Bundy Chanler CoAroth Conk-
bug Darling Davis Dawson Dsirees Delano, DeLng Den
Order Harding Ky Hays, Hii Hogan Hubbard w "
Hubbard (Ct), Hubbe N. W Hulburd James Humphrey,
Lswrenes lPsJ Lawrence COio) LeBlond Marshall Mar,
ston hsIyfn, Mercur. Miller, Morrill,, Myers, Newell,