Newspaper Page Text
NLCHAtKA AND KANSAS. SPICCCH OF HON. JOHN i*. CASKIE, OF VIRGINIA, In the House of Rejarescntatiees, May 19, 1864. The House being in Couunitteo of the \S hole on the state of the Union, Mr. Olds in the chair? . Mr. CASIvIE rose and said : Mr. Chairman: The tield of Kansas-Nebras- j ka debate has not only been reaped but gleaned. Nevertheless, there are reasons why 1 desire to preseut )ny views, and I shall be content if I c;in find here and there a stray stalk to add to the rich shocks of argument and illustration which have already been gathered and given to the country. As was to be expected, we have had an arduous struggle, not yet ended, and its attendant difficulties and excitements. Still, considering the deeply important and exciting character of the question, there has been, on the whole, a very gratifying degree of kindness and consideration in our discussions. And well it may be so, for?taking the large view of the matter?we can but congratulate ourselves upon the happy auspices under which the grand issue ot the day is before this House and the country. are considering and ap plying the great principles of our government, when not only there is nothing which should vex and disturb our delilicrations, but every thing invites to calm aud patriotic investiga tion and decision. Peace and Plenty crown our country. We are respected abroad and happy at home. Our treasury overflows, and our industrial pursuits yield rich returns. There is at least a lull, in mere political warfare, and a noble spirit of search alter truth is abroad. Truly this is a lit time to explore fundamental doctrines, and to correct departures from them. Surely this is a most lit time to remove any cause of division and dissension among our selves, to repeal unequal and unjust legisla tion. to cast off irritating and odious restric tions, and give to our whole wide domain, in all its purity and power, that masterpiece ol wisdom and justice, that talisman which has saved us from snares, defended us from evil, and loaded us with blessings?the Constitution of our country. The great measure of organizing a large ex tent, of our fair possessions upon a constitution al basis is before us, the representatives of the People, with the emphatic sanction of the rep resentatives of the States. A happy augury is found in the fact that this proposal for jus tice to the south is presented from the north, inaugurated by a gallant senator, there born. there living, and there to be buried, who, hap pen what may. has at least, in the language ol one of my colleagues in the other wing ol the Capitol, married his name to a great princi ple," and I will add, entrenched himself for ever in ihe hearts of millions of his country men. it has found supporters, too, in men from the same region who grace the senatorial dignity, and are imbued with the spirit of that brotherhood which our lathers strove to secure under the sacred shield of the equality of all the Slates and sections of our confederacy. In approaching the subject of the rights,of all the people of all the States, in and to fheir ter ritorial property, acquired by their common and conjoined efforts and means, which is involved in the creation of governments for Nebraska and Kansas, 1 trust I have the spirit and teni per which the circumstances to which i have adverted are suited to inspire. Feeble as rny views of this well-nigh exhausted question may be, 1 hope they are conceived without preju dice, anil will be presented without passion. 1 shall trv ioforgct the wrongs which I believe the south to have suffered, and to re in ember the * disposition which is shown to ri; lit them. M\ aim will be to see the north in ihe face not ol the fanatic, but of the patriot, to regard it as personated by a Douglas, a Richardson, aud their worthy compeers, rather than by some to whom our rules forbid that 1 should more than allude. Above ail I shall endeavor to look away from latitude aud longitude, and to keep an eye single to that Constitution which we have all with our lip3 and I hope with our hearts, swon to support ?, aud to that (ornitry which is tlit heritage alike of the Vcrruontcr and Virginian of the New Yorker and Carolinian. And this is really no hard task to a southerner ami slaveholder, at any rate after we lose the lirsl feeling natural upon hearing the reckless abuse of our institutions, with which some member* sometimes regale themselves in this llall. Anger soon yields to contempt! The south is satisfiod with her situation. The south knows what African slavery is; she knows not only that it is exclusively her own concern, and her own responsibility, but that she has against interference with it, the solemn guarantee of the most sacred treaty ever made among sovereignties, under which most of us were bora, and all live. Then she may well not chafe, but smile at-the impotent rage of her assailants. Her conscience in this matter is as clear as her authority is plain, and she dis [laiiui to defend herself. She is content with the loyalty and love of her white population while she looks with no ordinary gratification on what she has done for the black race in her midst. Reviled as she is, it is surely pardon able that the south contemplates with pride a* well as pleasure, her benefactions to the Alri can?that with pride and pleasure she sees how fitted for obedience as lie is, and requiring con trol as he does, he has found the necessity o! his nature in her guardian ownership?that slit views his rescue from brutal barbarism, lm Christianity aud comtort?that, in short, she re members how, in her midst and under hn policy, he has attained the very highest devel opment to which lie has reached at any perioc of his existence.? . Hut enough of this, which is but bare allu sion. I certainly do not mean to discuss tht institutions of the south. Our only business is to inquire whether there is any warrant for in vidious discriminations against those institu , tions, or the people ol the south on account ol them, in respect to property which must be admitted to belong to all the States, to the ac quisition of which the slaveholder and the non slaveholder have alike contributed, and hold the same title. If we could only divest our selves of prejudice, and sectional sympathies and traditions, I apprehend that, Wasting as we do of the equality of our citizens, no propo sition would appear more monstrous than an attempt to hem a great division ot them within arbitrary boundaries, and deprive it of parti cipation in that which has been bought with their money, or won by their valor. It would be strange if countrymen were found so vari ant and "discordant, that fhere was necessity f.,r drawing a line of partition between them, trivin" the territory, above a certain latitude, to be held exclusively by one section, while that below was similarly assigned to the other. * But such a partition would only be the so c-illed Missouri settlement, as there seems to be a sort of vague impression on many minds that it is. 'i he wonder grows, when we con template that settlement, as in fact it is. ( 1 is not only "strange, but passing strange, t..i one portion of atonic should have the arro gance to claim for themselves, in a phamaical "'and tern per, the enjoyment of all the common property, while they exclude their fellow-ciUzens from far more than half of it. There has been a more than cliristain meek* ? ness in the forl>earance and submission of the despoiled section. Aud yet is the attempt that, and nothing more, to obliterate the unsighy ur.constitutional line of f 3C, to he people who arc to live under institutions the privilege of choosing then, for themselves, with out our dictation or medliug, of Peni',!tl1'^ them t?j eot.y from the south or the nort as they tuny |,w^se, above that line as they o below it, which has not only made politicians violent, but clergymen impious, and raised all the din and outcry which now distract the north. Do the northern supporters of the Mis souri line reflect upon the admission which their position involves? They laud their free institutions, they claim that they arc every way preferable to and stronger than ours, and they delight to sing praises to the virtue and intel- | ligence of the people. Yet when we say, well, let the people who are to choose, have an op portunity of seeing our institutions for them selves alongside of yours, and after having during their territorial pupilage, observed the I working of both, just let them, when they come to organize a State for themselves and their chil dren after them?just let them determine which they prefer, you shrink back and call on a Mis souri restriction to shield you from lair competi tion upon an open arena, even when you claim and may have all the advantages of soil and cli mate on your side. You cannot except to the tribunal It is fair and honest, and has the deepest stake in a right decision. W hy, then, fear its determination ? Is it that you doubt your cause ? Is there the rub? It is not for me to counscl northern repre sentatives as to their duty to their own consti tuents! still as a citizen of a common country 1 claim the right to say to them that 1 have much mistaken that face-to-face manliness which I l>elieve characterizes the masses of the whole American people, if they get credit at home, for the back-out from a lair field and a gener ous rivalry, which 1 submit they will make it they oppose this measure. In all respect and kindness I venture to suggest that they will find it ditlicult to explain to their constituents, who, quietly tilling their lands and working at their trades, really believe in the virtue and strength aud superiority of their own institu tions, how they refused those institutions an honest, manly and fraternal competition with those of the south. Aye, there will l>e wonder how true men can decline, not a challeuge loi battle, but the knightly gage, which invites to noble lists; and impartial umpirage. And there will be more than wonder should the powerful ' and dominant north shrink from such lists be hind the shelter of 30? 30', and prefer the resort of a congressional restriction to a brotherly ' encounter where the Constitution is the law, 1 and under it, the people the judges. I trust ' the committee will remember the Catholic spirit 1 in which I try to speak, aud that my northern friends will find no fault when I tell theiu that if they defeat this bill, I shall in that benign spirit which seeks " good out of evil congratu late the south that in the year 1851 we have at least gained the emphatic confession that north ern institutions, are ofthat tender sort for which our hardy Constitution does not answer, and which, to thrive, must have congressional" pro tection." I'assing from this subject, and taking up a prominent objection to the bill, I trust, it I seem summary in its disposition, it will be attributed to no want ot courtesy to those who make it, but to the thoroughness of my conviction about it. 1 can only construe the clamor as to plight ed faith?sacred compact?1ild id (nunc yams" of appeal, which has so abounded here, as a coerced concession of the strength of the prin ciple which the bill asserts, and a new proof of the old adage, "drowning men catch at straws.'' Can two things be more opposite than what is claimed for the Missouri restriction by its friends, and its true character as presented by the historical records of the country? That character has been so often and so clearly shown, during the debate on this bill, that it would be folly in me, limited as 1 am to a brief hour, to do more than allude to it. What shall 1 select to say about it? Every body knows that it was but an act of Congress repealable in its very nature. The idea that members of Congress, w ho alone established the line of 30? 30', (for observe that not even Mis souri was consulted about it,) have a right to make unconstitutional sacred compacts, is a novelty which there is little dangerwdl supplant the old'fashioned notion that we arc merely law-makers, bound to vote on each proposi tion as our consciences dictate, and with no shadow of authority to barter votes with each other or to make treaties for our respective sec tions. The States have done that lor them selves in an instrument called the Constitution, > which we oiler as the law for both north and 1 south in Nebraska and Kansas. Everybody knows that the law by which Mis ' souri came into the Union as a slaveholding : State, was not the same with that which drew ' the line of 36? 30', and dared declare an insti 1 tution of half the States a political leprosv, which should shut its possessors within bounds and limits. The knowledge is ?iOM>equallygen eral that not even Missouri (the rights of whose people were specially invaded) conceded on her admission anything which in any way affects Nebraska and Kansas. True, she was made to yield as the fcpudition ofthat admission with her slaves, a privilege as to free negroes, which is now exercised by Indiana and Illinois, if not other free Suites. That was all. Besides all these facts, there are many moKe which make it as strange that the south can be invoked to regard Ml)0 30' as a line of compact and obliga tion. as it is that American statesmen should object to govern territories by the Constitution, and permit the people to pronounce their own republican institutions in their State constitu tions. The journals with their stubborn array of names and numbers, testify that the 3t>? 30' restriction was after those varying tides and shifting results, which we all know characterize a legislative struggle in these halls, forced up on an unwilling south. > They tell, too, of the northern vote, the very . next year, viz: in 1*21 against the admission ol Missouri, as also of the vote given by the . same section in 1830, on the admission of Ar kansas. The history of the annexation of I Texas is pregnant with instructions as to the estimation in which many ol those who would now dress 3fi? 30' in a sort of legislative ca , nonicals, then held it. When we come down to the date of our acquisitions from Mexico? scarce a hand's breath of time behind us?do we find our northern friends doing homage to f this now consccrated latitude? I have strange ly misread history if any were then "sojioor as to do it reverence" among those who are now its worshipjiers. The south then offered [ it in a spirit of concilation and concord, and it was repudiated by the north. A Douglas and others were then willing to accept it sis a j settlement of a vexed and dangerous question, . while many of its present friends gave to its proposal an emphatic negative, as from the record will fully and at large appear. Then came the adjustment of *50, out of which the south got nothing that 1 can perceive, save the organization of a territory which extends north of 36? 30', without the application to it ? of the Missouri restriction. I say the south got nothing else; for the fugitive slave law is no more a concession to her than there would ; be a concession to you, Mr. Chairman, if a man who had for years owed you a debt, under a solemn covenant which had not been enforced, should give a bond for its payment, which ini"ht facilitate its collection. What the south yielded, 1 forbear to dwell upon, for it is surely not my purpose to re-open any wound. In the course of that memorable contest, the south again offered the Missouri line, and again was it r< jected by the north. I barely advert to these events, for my time will not allow detailed citation. Besid. s the expositions of the subject already made, among which I may mention those of my colleague, in the other wmg of the Capitol, and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Stephen's) in this House, well nigh exhaust it. More lhan all, the records are open to the country, and my utmost hopes on this point will be realized if I can induce those who doubt to search those records to see whether, "indeed, these things be true. One thing on which I cannot forlx ar to remark, and I pass on. I trust I shall always speak of the times and the men that have gone before us with , the deference which becomes one young and undistinguished like myself. But do not the annals of '20 and '21 furn ish a striking example of the way in which great excitements can sway and wheel even great men from great principles. Whatever may bo said about the accuracy and fidelity of our representation of the people, I think that to paraphrase a Latin proverb, it may be safely said, that nobody in tho country dreams what some member of Congress does not speak. Now, is there a man in this Capitol who holds that we have the right to fetter a State through all timo on the subject of slavery ? Is there a man who believes that if New York or New Jersey should desire to establish slavery with in their limits to-morrow, there could, under any conceivable circumstances, be authority hero to control them and forbid it. Yet read the leading proposition in connexion with the application of Missouri and the vote upon it, and noto the word "forcvcv" in the very re striction wc are considering: "A/itl L, u further enacted. That in all that ter ritory ceded l>y France to the United Stales under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of 30? 30' north latitude, not included within the limits of the Slate contemplated by this act, slavery and invol untary servitude, otherwise than in the punish ment of crimes whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever pro hibited." \ et it is to that era and to that Congress, so many members of which completely cut the constitutional cable, that we are referred not only for organic lessons but eternal compacts! There wcro men, however, of that day, not only in Congress but out of it, of the most distin guished of our patriots and sages, whose opin ions and feelings well warrant the man of '54 in speaking as 1 do of the legislation of it. All remember that .to tho father of the republican party the Missouri question was a " fire bell in the night." One of my colleagues [Mr. Faulk ner] lias already quoted to you the opinions of the three statesmen whom, in succession, Vir ginia gave to the presidency of the Union, and whose services go back to the revolution. He has told you, Mr. Chairman, how Jefferson de clared that "this Missouri question, by a geo graphical line of division is the most porten tious one that I have ever contemplated. How Monroe said " that the proposed restriction as to territories which are to be admitted into the Union, if not in direct violation of the Consti tution, is repugnant to its principles."How Madison admitted that ho " must own"' he had " always leaned to tho belief that the restri'c tion was not within the true scope of the Con stitution." All know that her senators, Plea sauts and Barbour, stood in firm opposition to the unconstitutional restriction. Another of my colleagues | Mr. Smith] has pointed you to the fact that eighteen out of the twenty-three representatives, which in 182(> Virginia had on this floor, voted against this "eighth section," upon which, in 1851, one of their successors is continuing their war. I will go further, and read you tlleir names, for I am happy to contribute a mite towards keeping them in everlasting remembrance. They are Mark Alexander, William S.Archer, 'liilip I'. Barbour, William A. Bnrwell, Rbbert S. Garnett, James Johnson, James Jones, Wil liam M'CJoy, Thomas Newton,Severn K. Parker, James Pindall, John Randolph, Ballard Smith, Alexander Smyth, Thomas Van Swearingcn, (ioorge Tucker, John Tyler, and Jarcd Wil liams. Here a V irginian must be permitted to pause a moment. No man who loves his State, ami has an idea how I love mine, can be surprized that I do. Remember how "Old Virginia" and her abstractions are often alluded to herein silly sneer and stupid jest. Sec her now, just where she was in 1S20. Think how the Senate already has conic back to the position which Virginia held more than thirty years ago, and has never since deserted. Thinkthat the eighteen Virginians whose names I have given you were her contribution to the forty two who were all that could be rallied from the whole Union against this "eighth section," at the time of its passage, while one hundred and thirty-four votes were cast in its favor. Think how now the majority of this House, as we verily believe, stands not only ready, but eager to vindicate the patriotism and wisdom of Virginia's eigh teen. Ponder these things, and then tell me if it be a fault that she is immoveable in her poli ties. Ponder these things, and then tell me if, after all, her good old principles are not the sheet-anchor of our safety. There are objections entertained even bv some who arc opposed to the longer continu ancc of geographical discrimination against the south, to certain provisions of the bill for the organization of Nebraska and Kansas. Now. for my own part, I am wedded to no particular form of phraseology, nor indeed to anything in connection with these territories, except the recognition in our legislation in respect to them, of true constitutional principles. Any conces sion which can with propriety be made, to the scruples, or difiiculties, or embarrassments of any true friend of the grand doctrine fur which we contend, I hold should bo made. At the same time, all will admit that, assailed as this momentous measure is. it is imperative on its supporters to avoid all carping criticism, and to view it with the disposition, of argument rather than dissension, of harmony rather than discord. J he fact that on a question like this, any true southern men, knit together as they are by the possession of a common, and vital, and incessaiitlyassailcd interest, should differ, is another example of the difficulty of securing unanimity on any subject whatever. While in many aspects this is to be lamented, a good may come out of the evil. By a frank and gen erous comparison of our views, and a thorough sifting of the question before us, Ave may all pain a clearer comprehension of our position, and find light shed upon the path which is be fore us. in examining the speech of my able col league whose scat is near my own, [Mr. Mn.i. sox,J I could but wish he had quoted the pro visions on which he commented. As I find in them that which 1 deem of importance, and which did not seem so to strike him, and as it is always well to see things in their connex >oy, I will read the whole of that part of the bill with which we arc concerned, und frankly com ment unon it. I quote from the fourteenth sec tion, which refers to Nebraska. The thirty with'it- Ch FCfCrS t0 Kansas> is identical "J*"1'" Constitution and nil laws of the i" n?h are not locally inapplicable shall have the same lorc,. RM<1 cfJJ J, n ? said Tern ory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the niteil Slates, except the eighth section of the I act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into ! the Union, approved March sixth, eighteen hun dred and twenty, which. i^gSJ w ,h the principle of non-intervention l.y Congress with slavery in the States and TernmncsTfecoc ni/ed l>y the legislation of eighteen hundred ami tidy, commonly called the compromise measures is hereby declared inoperative nnd void: it the true intent and meaning of this act not to \c* islato slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to lenve the people there of perfectly free to form and regulate their domes tic institutions in their own way, subject onlv to the Constitution of the United States : Provided 1 hat nothing herein contained shall bo construed to revive or putin force any law or regulation which may have existed prior to the act of sixth March, eighteen hundred and twenty, cither pro Jdavcry :,e8lubli"hin?' Inhibiting, or abolishing Observe, now, "Ute Constitution," which even abolitionists admit recognizes slavery "and all tows of the Lnited States which are not locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and .(r . -.1 ? , .. ... iww Hiiu effect within the said Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States." A very good.beginning, I submit; a very practical and ?? isfactory clause. Some very valuable iniar mnties and stout defences of right# of property, apprehend, arc to be found in the Constitution and aU taws of the Lnited States not locally inapplicable. 3 Candor compel* nic to ?ay that I do not much fancy tho reason given for tho declara-1 tion that the "eighth section of the act pre paratory to the admission of Missouri," is in operative and void. That is, perhaps, because the legislation 1850 was never a favorite with me), although 1 sincerely rejoice that its friends place such "a feather in its cap" as incompati bility with the odious line of :5t>? 3C. 1 should have much preferred that the notorious "eighth section' should have been ruled "inoperative and void, because it was unjust and unfair to a great part of the confederacy, subversive of the equality of the States, anil in violation of the Constitution of our country. However, that is ol but little importance. It is matter of recital, not of substance. I love the lan guage which the bill uses whe? it comes effec tually to deal with tho aforesaid "eighth sec tion.' ''Inoperative and void!" It is not admitted to the dignity of a repeal. That would concede to it a valid and legitimate existence. No, it is void. By plain implication, not only wrong, but unconstitutional; not voidable, but void, and a nullity. Admirable words! In my humble judgment better could have been chosen. Hut I pass on. xt { wo Ejections have been suggested to tho Nebraska-Kansas bill, which, if tucy can be re moved, will take?if not "stumbling blocks and rocks ol offence"?at least difficulties out of the way of some who are with us on the grand issue involved. The first is language to in the bill which is thought to countenance what is familiarly termed " squatter sovereignty"or the right of a territorial legislature, to exclude the property of the south from the domain of the I nion. The other is to what is called the Bad ger amendment. ' Now, as to " squatter sovereignty;" a phrase which I use mere for convenience, and certainly in no unkind or sneering spirit. In common with at least ninety-nine out of a hundred ofthe people of my State, 1 deny, in the words of one ol our democratic conventions, that there is " power either in Congress or a territorial leg islature, which is its creature, or anywhere else, save only in the people of a Territory in the formation of a State constitution preparatory to admission into the Union to prevent the mi gration of any citizen of any State with his pro perty, whether it be slaves or anything else, to any domain which may be acquired bv the common blood and treasure of the people of all the States. Aud Mr. Chairman, with all re spect for those who differ from hie, 1 must be permitted to say that in the whole range of po litical truth there is no proposition more plain and obvious to my mind than the one I have just announced. I cannot even yet comprehend how gentlemen can deny a power to Congress and give it to that which is but the " breath of its nostrils"?a territorial legislature. So to do, is, it seems to me, not only to scout what 1 had supposed was the perfectly settled maxim of common sense as well as common law," non dctquinonhabet:' but to put the creature above the creator and make the lc3s exceed the "rea ter. 1 have not time to argue "squatter sove reignty'" fully, nor is it necessary that I should, lor it is a new notion, a modern invention, dating its existence no farther back than 1848, and until then as unknown to the practice of tho government, and the deliberations of states men, as it now is to tho Constitution of the country. Territories arc not States. They cannot exercise the powers of States, a?d their inhabitants cannot divest the citizens of the United States of the right in ami to their lull and complete enjoyment. Why, in the bill lie tore us, as in all other Territorial bills since the foundation of the government, it is provided that governors and judges shall be not chosen by the inhabitants of the Territory, but ap pointed by the Executive ofthe United States. We pay their expenses, and no territorial dele gate on this floor lias a vote, which would be monstrous, if their 6rgani/.ation involved even an approach to sovereignty. It is undoubtedly consonant with^the spirit of our institutions to allow to the inhabitants of the Territories the use of all powers which can be cxercised by them consistently with the rights of others, and God forbid that I should abate them a hair sbrcadth. My position is in no senseai/ainut the people of the Territories; it is entirely for the people of the States. I would deny nothing to the former which could be granted without the violation of some, plain right of the latter. There is no question of popular sovereignty here. The authority of territorial inhabitants is restricted, not because of what they are, but because of where, they are. Individually, they are the full equals of the people of a State, but their organization is the embryo of which a State is the development. It is no more a hardship to them that they cannot exercise in a territory the powers which they could in a State, than it is to you or me, Mfi Chairman, that our privileges in this Hall are very different from what they are in o\ir own houses. We are the same men in both places, but differ ently situated, and that is all there is about it. ,Wliy, sir. I venture to suggest that it- will be no great advance on some views which have been presented, after a while to hold that when the United States lias built, and equipped, and paid for a ship of war, the sailors, citizens, and sovereigns, all may. as the occupants of the. property, and the parties, most interested, by virtue of some indefinable inherent right, de termine what shall be her character and desti nation ; nay more, whether she shall fight for or against her country. But I have said enough on this point. Now comes the ques tion. Is there any such reason in the differ ence between myself and some of the friends of the Nebraska-Kansas bill in regard to the opinions I have just expressed, as should create division between us in reference to it, or make me or them hesitate in its support. I answer emphatically, there is nothing. The bill gives the inhabitants of Kansas and Ne braska all the rights which they possess under the Constitution and none other, and leaves tho decision of what they are to tho courts. That is the agreement as to territorial sovereignty, plain as a pike staff on the face of the bill, and fair and honorable as it is plain. What savs tho bill: r 3 "It being the true intent nnd meaning of this not not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly tree to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, sub ject only to tho Constitution of the United States." Now, is it not clcar that, if territorial sove reignty be in the Constitution, it is in the bill ?if not in the Constitution, it is not in the bill? This is a ground and the only ground on which just men united in opposition to the Missouri re striction, but divided as to an incidental question connected with it, can meet and stand together. If territorial sovereignty be in tho Constitution I hope I am patriot enough to yield all opposition to it, and if it be not, I am sure that my friends who differ from ine about it, are patriots enough to yield all udvocacy of it. And so we go hand in band to break down Disunion, that "middle wall of partition," which now separates sec tions, and to re establish that broad brother hood under which our independence was achieved, and on which our government is based. Can I object to the arbitrament to which the bill submits tho question of Terri torial authority to exclude us? Never, while I retain the confidence I now have in the posi tion I hold?-never, until I can believe that the illustrious Carolinian, my political morning star, was no herald of tho day, and that tho whole^ host of southern men were dolts when, in 1850, they proposed, upon far less induce ment, to submit far graver issues to the same arbitrament. If I look to tho past decisions of the court wi i a view to judge their future determina ions, surely not even my honorable colleague can find any reason why I should distrust them on this question or fear to leave it to them. course I can make no elaborate review of ose decisions in tho very limited time which our rules allow me. I will, however, quote a passage from an early case in which the unani "P1".10" the court was delivered by Chief Justice, in "Sere and Laralde vs. I'itot and others," Crauch 332, decidcd in 1810, we find: ... ? The power of governing and of legislating lor a territory i* the inevitable vOHM|u?iu of the right to acquire and to hold territory. Could this position be contested, the Constitution of twe Uni ted State# declares thai 'Congress ?'hall have power to iliipotfc ol and make ull needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the I 'nited States. Accord ingly, we lind Congress possessing and exercising the absolute and undisputed power ol governing and legislating lor the Territory of Orleans. Gou "ress |<ns given them a legislative, an executive, and a judiciary, with such powers as it has been their will to assign to those departments respec tively." 1 should say that the legal timidity must bo very great, which could hesitate to commit the question of "sauattor sovereignty'' to a tribu nal which had that idea of the relation between Congress and the Territories. It is just, sim ply, and absolutely impossible that the Supremo Court can hold that a territorial legislature may exclude us of the south with our slaves from Nebraska and Kansas, when Congress posseses no such power. 1 have no fears for the result of the agree ment which this bill makes upon the question of territorial powers. I'll stand " the hazard,' not of "the die," but of judicial decision on such an issue, and not only readily but joyfully. My friends who differ from me, will, I doubt not, do the same. So " brethren will dwell to gether in unity," and those who hope to intro duce discord among us will find that "they reekon without their host." Now a few words as to the Badoer amend ment. I understand its intent and effect to be at the very j'drl/iest, no more than this: a formal and emphatic declaration on the part of the south, that she is willing without the invocation of any special legislation whatever to rest her claim to the joint occupation of Ne braska and Kansas, simply and solely on the Constitution of our country. The motive for its introduction, I understand to be this: after the argument on the abrogation of the Mis souri restriction had far progressed, almost to its conclusion, after the friends of the bill had appealed to the principles and guarantees of the Constitution, as both the sword and shield of their argument and de maud, and no southern senator had ever intimated reliance on anything else, it was not only suggested, but urged that, in fact, the south meant to court [the protection and aid of the laws of France, which had existed prior to our acquisition of Louisiana. The enemies of the bill eagerly seized upon this weapon of assault; Some of its northern friends were embarrassed, and disturbed. What, then?. Why, the south simply said?this matter may be ! settled at once, our northern friends relieved and our northern enemies disarmed, we arc willing to put in formal and unmistakable lan guage, that which we liavo so often asserted and insisted upon. Thus we vindicate our sin cerity atid smooth the road to our great object. If it be true (and what southerner doubts it?) that the Constitution does recognize our slave property and* gives us equal rights in and to the common possessions of the Union with our northern brethren, if we have no misgivings as to these propositions, is not tin bill as it stands all we can desire? Kvenifwo might find some muniment of title in the old French fnw or any other special enactment, why make a question about it, if indeed the Constitution be that im pregnable fortress of our rights which wc have always claimed that it is? The bill opens its wide" gates to us. When invited within its strong walls, why should we care for mud re doubts of French or Spanish, or Territorial laws? I presume there is no man who would not prefer to hold and enjoy his property by virtue of the plain provisions and lofty guaran tees of the Constitution of his own Country, rather than resort to intricate and doubtful dis putations as to the resurrection of laws which have slumbered for a generation at least. We all know that the Clayton compromise was sup ported by almost the whole southern represen tation inCongrCss, true-hearted, clear-headed no ble old John C.Calhoun at their head, when that compromise agreed to leave to the courts the set tlement of the rights of the south under the Constitution to the whole territory acquired from Mexico with Mexican anti-slavery laws unrepealed into the bargain. Why, Mr. Chairman, a frank and explicit declaration in the bill, of the sincerity of our arguments and professions was becoming to the south, lfow, I beg to ask, could we re fuse it? What do we lose by it ? Is there any man who hears me, who does not know that the south has no protection save in the Constitu tion or disunion. Neither French, nor Span ish laws, nor antiquated territorial legislation which the geographical industry of my es teemed colleague may show, did once, but not now, apply to a territory where there were neither white men nor negroes will avail. They will all bend like reeds before the blast. Nothing can stand it save that "brave old oak" of which the Nebrask-Kansas bill is a noble scion?the Constitution. The view 1 have presented is sufficient for me. (live me the Constitution in its integrity, and purity, and power, and I care not a groat for anything beyond it. But I will take a technical view of the subject. My colleague, the other day in answer to a question of the gentleman from Georgia, gave us, with much distinctness, his interpretation of, and objection to, the Badgeu amendment, and I respectfully submit that he has en tirely mistaken its import. He considers it a positive declaration or enactment on the part ol this Congress, that there shall be no revival of any law relating to slavery which may have ex isted in the Territory which we propose to or ganize under the governmcnts?of Nebraska and Kansas. Now, the bill says no such thing. It only provides, <l That nothing hevcin contained shall be construed to revive or put in force any law or regulation which may have existed prior to the act of sixth of March, eighteen hundred and twenty, cither protecting, establishing, pro hibiting,or abolishing slavery." In other words, not that the laws in question shall not be re vived, but simply that we do not undertake to revive them. Any force which may be inhe rent in tKem, is left unimpaired and untouched. If they come into being aliunde the bill, well and good. There is nothing to interfere with them. We only agree that we will not con strue the negation of a prohibition into the affirmation of a protection. We do not say that the laws in question shall not live again or do not now live, but we say that, living or dead, this bill does not destroy them; it only does not re-enact them. Congress does not propose now to disturb them. " I can but think that perhaps the dif ference between my colleague and myself, as to the Badger amendment, may be traced to a difference in our views as to the Missouri re striction. 1, believing it to be wholly uncon stitutional, am of course satisfied with the de claration of the fact that it is inoperative and void, and remembering the maxim, "ex niliilo nil Jit" and that much less can the abrogation of a nullity be the parent of any thing. I am of I course careless in reference to all such matters as the amendment or proviso we are consider in^. My colleague, on the other hand, believ ing, as I am inclined to think he docs, the re striction constitutional and operative, not un naturally regards its relation to laws which ex isted anterior to its passage in a light very va riant from that in which it appears to ine. But it may be asked if the Missouri line be unconstitutional, inoperative, and null, do 1 desire its repeal? For many reasons. 1 wish the legislation of the country to be right, to have our statute books unblemished by any un just, unequal, and odious enactment. I would of course have the great question of southern rights under the Constitution disencumbered of adverse congressional action, and my constituents assured lhat any discrimination against or limitation upon their right to enjoy the common property of the Union is void in the judgment of the representatives of the peo | plo?aye, sir, void. I love that word in this connexion. It id music to my ears to hear the Missouri restriction prououueed, as this hill pronounces it, u void.' But suppose I were wrong in all this. Why should we stickle about the Uadger proviso, in lace of the fact so truly and triumphantly de clared and dwelt upon by two of my colleagues who have proceeded me in this discussion. 1 mean of course ihe fact that in no State of the Union has slavery been introduced by positive legislation, but in every one it has planted it self and grown and flourished upon that very tabula rami, which, in its least favorable as pect for the south is all the hi 1 can be claimed to be. Tell me not, however, of a Territory's being tabula rasa, when the Constitution is its law. Call it rather a place where every right of every citizen of every State, slaveholding and non-alaveholding, is fully secured and pro tected. Had I time, I should bo pleased to discuss other views which have been taken of this sub ject. They have been so ably presented by others, that I know I can shed no new light upon thcin. They are cumulative, however. Thoy make "assurance doubly sure." lean not forbear a reference. It must be very hur ried. While I do not hold that it is necessary to have men upon it, in order to extend laws over land, it docs seem rather farcical, 1 con fess, that any body should boggle, with such a prize in view as that which now glitters before our grasp, about laws which possibly may have had a technical, but never n practical exten sion over cither Nebraska or Kansas. Why, although emigration now so presses upon those Territories, that their organization has become indispensable, yet we have no know ledge of the residence of either white man or negro there, except licensed traders and such slaves as the Indians are said to have. I can add nothing to the argument so ably mado by the senator who moved the proviso, and that of my friend from Tennessee, |Mr. Smith,J whoso argument is as clear as it is conclusive. They show, beyond controversy, that the rule?" if a statute which repeals another is itself repealed afterwards, the first statute is thereby revived without any formal words for that purpose,"?is founded upon the merest presumption of legislative intent, and is controlled by any expression of that iutent. Then, their conclusion is ensy and inevitable that the Nebruska-Kansas bill is the same with or without the proviso. It seems to me very clear, that as to terri tory acquired from 1'ranee, as Nebraska and Kansas were, the rule of the civil, and not that of the common law, governs the question I am now considering. There is no necessary connexion between this government and the common law. The civil law stands In the same relation to territory which wo acquired from France, that the common law does to that which we won from England. Now, both the senators from Louisiana (skilled as they are in the civil law) tell us that the common law rule in reference to the offect ol the repeal of a repealing statute docs not ob tain in the civil law. Neither has any objec tion to the proviso. But 1 can barely touch these points, and invite attention to them. After all, with mo, it is sutlicient that the bill gives me, in the vast and rich domain of Ne braska and Kansas, the Constitution of my country in exchange for the Missouri restric tion. There, upon the Constitution, 1 am will ing to rest the interests of myself and those I represent. As a southern man, my heart leaps at the thought of abrogating forever that accursed "riijhlh section" which declared us tainted, branded us with inferiority, and put us within prison bounds. Pass this bill, and for one I shall draw a deeper and freer breath than ever before, for 1 was born under the 3(?? 30' re striction, and only when it is removed can 1 feel myself and my constituents the equals of all other admitted citizens of the country. Who can wonder at the rise and progress of abolitionism, while a congressional insult' to the south not only stands upon your statute book, but is canonized into a compromise. To the friend of the Union this bill makes a strong appeal. Let me tell our northern brethern?those who love that fraternal league which the fathers of the republic made for them and us?that they have now an opportu nity of healing a wound of far keener ami sorer irritation to the thoughtful southern mind than is suspected by the superficial observer. I have already called the .'!<>? .'!0' line a disunion lino, and is it not emphatically so? it is a line of separation and division, ft is a line of un just discrimination, and odious inequality. 7/ in a 11 is it n ion liar. Above all, this bill affords a firm and sure ground upon which all who love and trust the Constitution may stand together. And to it they have flocked and are flocking from the north and the south, the east and the west. Already the power of the people is upon it?the people who stand ready to sustain and strengthen their re presentatives, when we shall lay the Missouri restriction in the dust and proclaim that justice to the south is fidelity fo the Constitution and safety to the Union. IT^URNITURE.?A Good and I^arge As sortment of Centre, Card, Work. Side, mul Extension Dining: Tables, of every description, ami superior quality. Sofas, Tete-n-tetes, Divans Easy Hocking and Parlor Chairs of every descrip tion. Secretaries and Bureaus, Desks and Bu reaus. LOOKING (JLASSES Of-' EVERY DE SCRIPTION, Matresses, Curled flair, Hair Scaling*, Softt and Chair Springs, with numerous other articles suitable for housekeepers, which will be sold at less prices than can be purchased elsewhere. WIGHT A* CROSBY, Louisiana avenue, opposite the Bank of Wash ington, near the corner of 7tli street. I Notice the Bedstead sign. May 24?Sm. Dlt. KITTO'S GREAT WORK, COM plete. Daily Bible Illustrations, being origi nal Readings for a Year on subjects from Sacred History. Biography, Geography, Antiquities, and Theology, especially designed tor the family cir cle. by J. Kitto, D. D., fe volumes, 12ino, price S dollars. Any volume sold separately. GRAY & BALLANTYNE, May JC??tf 7th street. 17OR T,EASB The National Theatre in _ the city of Washington, for the ensuing sea son,or for a term-of years. The National Theatre is one of the largest in the world, and yet every meritorious attraction can (ill it. With the alterations and improvements con templatcd, it will be in every respect a desirable establishment. If a suitable company could be selected, the Proprietor would accede to the following arrange mcnt. The entire receipts to be distributed thus: The current expenses; the salaries of the members; the rent. All surplus to be divided among the members of the company, in the proportion o! their respective salaries. The Proprietor would have no claim for rent until after payment of cur rent expenses ami salaries. The proprietor would like, therefore, to receive communications, with particulars, from parties in clined to this mode of action. The purpose of the Proprietor is to secure the best talent by pay ing to it all the profits. Every letter received will be known to the Proprietor alone, who will not feel himself at liberty to reveal Ihe name of any party addressing liim on this subject. All communications pre-paid, and addressed "to the Proprietor of the National Theatre, box 212, Washington city, D. C. (CHAMPAGNE, WHITE WINES, AND j Fine Cordials.? Moet Ar Chandon'sSillery 1 ere.quality*) l)o Grand Vin d' Anglaixc, \ A.Oech' Do Oeil de l'erdrix, ) II. Piper iV Co.'* Ileidsicck. Rananld & Francois. Long worth A Zimmerman's Sparkling Catawba.* Uhas. Schnrinan s Sweet Catawba, Dadics' Wine. 11 nut SaBtemes and Chatenu Sauternes White Wines. Ilulsknmp, Zoon A Moyl(#"s fine Curacao, white and red, in jug*. Do do Anisette while, in bottles. Itosalia Maraschina Cordial. HHEKKLL A BAILEY, May 5?Jwif No. f>, oppo. Centre Market Cronstadt aud tl?e lialtic Fleet, Those who anticipate a "duelling blow" at Russia in the lialtic would do well to read the firstnaper in Eraser's Magazine for May, which siniply describes the naval and military ge ography of that twisted sea. The paper, in deed, is much more than an ordinury maga zine article, Composed by one who has an in timate and detailed knowledge of the ground who has been able to survey it, too, from the historical point of view, and from the most ad vantageous position accessible to an English man in liussiu, it possesses an authenticity com monly allowed only to olficiul papers; it is thoroughly practical in its purpose, clear and graphic in its lunguage. An English lleet entering the closed sea will not encounter its only trials at the intricate en trance. The difficulty which our fleet had in venturing to pass the sound with its shallow waters, the necessity lor taking the more cir cuitous route by the Great Belt, formed onjy a foretaste of the obstructive navigation, which increases as the capital of Russia is approached. Passing by the cliffa of Ilolstein, the sandy shores of Prussia, the granite rocks of Sweden ?leaving out of account the ice which walls up the water-way to the upper part of the Bal tic the greater part of the year?let us take only what might be considered the more vul nerable points. AVe need not dwell much upon Riga and the entrance to the Duua, strongly fortified though imperfectly manned, and not at present armed enough against attack to bo without terror at the name of Napier. The two parts of Russia that would seem to invito the desired blow arc Finland?for its supposed disposition to return to Sweden, and its importance in a military point of view for approaching Russia by land?and tho Gulf of Finland, the road to St. Petersburg. As to Finland, the province so dishonestly taken from Sweden in 1808, a priori, it might be supposed that the inhabitants, whose ethnological sym pathies with tho Muscovites arc small, would be ready enough to shako off the yoke, and re turn to their original fealty; but it will not do to trust in war to a priori reasoning. The Fins have a constitution secured to tliem for fifty years after the cession; they have several privileges; and there is no positive evidence of their Swedish tendencies. ' Moreover, the ap proaches are fortified by nature and the czar. The entrance to the gulf is gated by that group of eighty islands which go by tho general name of the largest, Aland; an archipelago of islands, straits, reefs, bays, and banks, which laugh at the entrance of any craft but the galleys and the gunboats of old north warfare. To the east, on the Finuish coast, lies, llelsingfors, and the fortified works which pass by the?gen eral name of Sveaborg; and here lies a prize which might tempt the approaching Napier, light sail of the line, a frigate, a corvette, and three steamers of the Russian Baltic fleet. But how to get at them? Through the sin gle passage of Helsingfors bay, between Lan gern and Vesser Svert, a passage two hundred yards in width, raked by a fire from the two islands, with other batteries to be passed ; and commanded by the great works of Sveaborg, a pile of battery, such as Sir Archibald Alison says the writer can alone describe; such, it would seem, as a John Martin alone could paint, under the inspiration of some military furor. Each series of works is complete in it self as regards stores of all kinds, and bomb proof cover. The batteries are formidable, both because they are unassailable in the bold ness of the rocks from which they arc carved and because they have the heaviest ordnance. Between Sveaborg and Revel lies the narrow entrance of the Gulf of Finland, whose shores recede from each other to meet again nearer Cronstadt, at the entrance of the estuary of the Neva. Well, if the fleet lying in the bay of Helsingfors cannot be seized, let the blow be struck upon St. Petersburg itself; and the Scandinavians of the Baltic provinces, taught to know that their czar is not . invulnerable, may be shaken from their allegiance by that once vigorous act of Napieresque daring. But how to get in ? There is, no doubt, the choice of two chan nels; but the northern is closed with a double or triple row of piles, five or six miles in length, ?vhich renders it accessible only to small craft. It is Ilobson's choice, therefore; and, taking the other channel, t he adventurous sea captain, on invasion bent, will have to steer his ship be tween Fort Alexander on the left, and Risbank 011 the right, each eight hundred yards distant; each built of granite and bristling with heavy guns; then came Fort Peter and the timber Fort of Cronslott, the last of no formidable character; but then again the adventurer en ters the " Middle Road," a passage two hun dred and fifty yards wide, commanded by Cron slott and Mole Head, and the huge granite built Fort Meuzikoff, with a very large number of guns. Beyond, in the narrowing channel lies a vista of land fortifications not practically important; no fleet in goose's file is likely to enter there, save as the Russian admiral effected his entrance into Helsingfors, when a Swedish admiral capitulated, by force yf golden artilery. Here, then lies the strength of Russia. She is a great hedgehog. lkr means of offence is not alarming: her screnty-two ships of all sizes, in her Baltic and Euxinc fleets, commanded by generals, with captaius who wear spurs, and gunners who place loss than one shot in a dozen?& Napier could easily put such a fleet under his arm, and present it to the British museum. But to be conquered, Russian ships must come out, and they show no impatience to be conquered. Russian fleets steal victories from English foes by stopping in doors ; and it is a winning game for the spurred sailors. A mammoth hedge hog, with a more than rhinocerous hide of gra nite, Russia cannot easily be made to fqcl blows. Perchance she may bo locked up and starved until her very intestines rebel; but this is tedi' ous work even for those to whom victory is promised in reversion. The only strength that can conquer inert, dogged,shameless obstinacy, is tin flagged patience, actively persevering pa tience in officers and men, tranquil, passive patience in a public, guarded against harass ing its own servants by expecting and demand ing impossibilities. P'enn mutual iIfe insuhanch Company of Philadelphia. Charter perpetual. All the profits divided among the policy-holders. This company is purely mutual. Capital*iS()0,000. David J,. Miller, president; John \V. Horner, sec retury. This company has declared a dividend o{ 2.ri per cent, on cash premiums received during the year 1S53. Pamphlets explaining rates, advan tapes, Arc., will be furnished parties interested, aud such are earnestly requested to examine them l*> fore insuring, as few companies oiler such induce ments. JAMES J. MILLKft, Agent, Over banking-house, Seidell, Withers <3c Co Medical examiner, J. M. Austin, M. D. Office and residence on F st^&el, north side, one door west of 10th. . May 2 UIIMM15 H C It WATS, MCARI-S, STOCKS, ^ aud Ties.?A large and varied assortment at LANK'S Gentlemen's Furnishing Store, Pennsylvania avenue, near \ J st. May 28?dlwif Medical cahik?i>iy. k. & j. Hunter, (physicians for diseases iif the chest, 4*e. I>eg to announce thnt they will remove to New York on the T?th of December next, or as soon thereafter as they shall have completed desired professional arrangements in regard to their prac tice in Washington ami llaltiniore. The motive for this change is that of being more central and easy of access to thoge visiting them from distant parts of the Union. Dr. Jumcs Hunter will, during the winter, visit professionally St. Augustine, Jacksonville, and the principal resorts for invnlids on the southern coast. Dr. Roliert Hunter will visit Washington and Baltimore on professional business once in each month alter December. Will be published in January next an American edition of Sir Charles Scudamore's work oo Inha la I ion, with an " Introduction," " Notes," md an Appendix, by K. Hunter, M. K. C. S. Nov Iti?ly (in)