A Report of the Debates and Proceedings in the Secret Sessions of the Conference Part 49

Mr. LOGAN:--Every State has the right to regulate transit within its own limits to suit itself. The proposed amendment gives no rights except such as are expressly named: "a right, during transportation, of touching at the ports, and of landing in case of distress." The right of the State to regulate transit is left unimpaired.

Mr. HOWARD:--There is one principle of law which will settle this question at once: property that is held under State laws must be transferred by the operation of State laws alone. Slaves are held and transferred by the specific laws of the States in which they are held.

Mr. PALMER:--The right of sale cannot possibly arise out of the right to touch during transportation at a port, or the right to land in case of distress. I cannot see the slightest occasion or necessity for the adoption of Mr. McCURDY'S amendment.

Mr. McCURDY'S amendment was rejected by the following vote:

AYES.--Maine, Vermont, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Indiana, and Iowa--7.

NOES.--New Hamps.h.i.+re, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, Illinois, and Kansas--14.

Mr. POLLOCK'S amendment was then adopted without a division.

Mr. VANDEVER:--I wish to propose an amendment by way of proviso:

"_Provided_ nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to prevent any State from prohibiting the introduction as merchandise of persons held to service or labor, or to prevent such State from prohibiting the transit of persons so held to service or labor through its limits."

Mr. FIELD:--This does not cover Mr. McCURDY'S proposition at all. Is there any secret purpose here to bring into the Const.i.tution a provision which will permit the sale of slaves in free States? If there is not, why not say plainly that the States shall have the exclusive right to determine who shall and who shall not cross its borders, and what shall be the subject of sale or traffic within them?

Mr. GUTHRIE:--The States have all the powers which are not expressly delegated under the Const.i.tution to be exercised by Congress. Congress has no power, except such as are expressly conferred upon them. The power to prohibit the sale of slaves rests somewhere. It has not been conferred upon Congress; it must remain in the State.

Mr. SMITH:--The argument of the gentleman from Kentucky seems to me very inconsistent with his report in other respects.

Mr. HOWARD:--The Border States are trying to get back the seceded States. We hope they will come back. We expect the adoption of this report to offer a strong inducement to them to return to the Union. It will not offer such inducement if its general effect is ruined by amendments.

The vote upon Mr. VANDEVER'S amendment resulted as follows:

AYES.--Maine, Vermont, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Indiana, and Iowa--7.

NOES.--New Hamps.h.i.+re, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania. Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, Illinois, and Kansas--14.

So the amendment was not agreed to.

Mr. CLAY:--I have already stated that the State of Kentucky is prepared to adopt the CRITTENDEN amendment; that amendment will be satisfactory to the Border States. The longer we remain here the more I become satisfied that the CRITTENDEN amendment will meet with more general favor than any other; therefore I ask the consent of the Conference to introduce the CRITTENDEN amendment as a subst.i.tute for the committee's report.

The consent of the Conference was not given to Mr. CLAY'S proposition.

Mr. GROESBECK:--I move to amend the third section by inserting after the words "in case of distress shall exist," the words "but not the right of transit in any other State or Territory without its consent."

We must certainly do something to cover this difficulty; if we omit the subject entirely, we shall leave much opportunity for cavil on this question when the question goes to the people.

Mr. RUFFIN:--I move to amend the amendment by subst.i.tuting in place of the words "without its consent," the words "against its dissent."

Mr. GROESBECK:--I will accept the amendment.

The amendment of Mr. GROESBECK was agreed to by the following vote:

AYES.--Maine, New Hamps.h.i.+re, Vermont, Ma.s.sachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ohio--10.

NOES.--Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Illinois--8.

Mr. ALEXANDER, of New Jersey, dissented from the vote of that State.

Mr. GRANGER moved that when the Conference adjourn it adjourn to half-past seven o'clock this evening.

The vote upon Mr. GRANGER'S motion was taken by States, and resulted as follows:

AYES.--Maine, New Hamps.h.i.+re, Vermont, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Kansas--13.

NOES.--Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri--6.

So the motion was adopted.

On motion of Mr. CHASE the Conference adjourned.

EVENING SESSION--SEVENTEENTH DAY.

WAs.h.i.+NGTON, MONDAY, _February 25th, 1861._

The Conference was called to order at half-past seven o'clock, Mr.

ALEXANDER in the chair.

Mr. SMITH, of New York:--I move that a committee of two be appointed by the PRESIDENT to arrange for the printing of the Journal.

The motion of Mr. SMITH was adopted, and the PRESIDENT appointed as such committee, Mr. SMITH, of New York, and Mr. HOWARD, of Maryland.

The Conference then proceeded to the consideration of the order of the day, being the third section of the article reported by the committee.

Mr. HITCHc.o.c.k:--I move to amend the third section by striking out the words "or Territory of the United States," occurring after the words "within any State."

I think we shall make the amendment more satisfactory by limiting the prohibition to States alone; still leaving the power in Congress to be exercised in conformity with the other provisions that regulate slavery in the Territories.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--I have the same objection to this as to other amendments. It may not be important, but I do not want to commence by adopting amendments at all.

The question was taken upon the amendment proposed by Mr. HITCHc.o.c.k, and was agreed to by the following vote:

AYES.--Maine, New Hamps.h.i.+re, Vermont, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Kansas--10.

NOES.--Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri--9.

Mr. SUMMERS:--I now desire to call up for consideration the amendment proposed by myself on the evening of the 23d instant. The state of the case is this: Mr. JOHNSON, of Maryland, moved an amendment to my proposition, which was accepted; my amendment was then rejected by a vote of the Conference, and on the 25th the Conference reconsidered the vote by which the amendment was rejected. I will not now repeat what I said, when the amendment was offered, in favor of its adoption. I would only call the attention of gentlemen to the remarks I then made, and say in addition, that I earnestly hope the Conference will now adopt the amendment. It will make the proposition much more acceptable to the South, and, certainly, not more objectionable to the North. The amendment is offered to the second section, and is as follows:

"No territory shall be acquired by the United States, except by discovery, and for naval and commercial stations, depots and transit routes, without the concurrence of a majority of all the Senators from States which allow involuntary servitude, and a majority of all the Senators from States which prohibit that relation; nor shall territory be acquired by treaty, unless the votes of a majority of the Senators from each cla.s.s of States hereinbefore mentioned, be cast as a part of the two-thirds majority necessary to the ratification of such treaty."

The amendment of Mr. SUMMERS was adopted by the following vote: