The New York Herald Newspaper, February 1, 1861, Page 8

fi 4 & as s i 5 Ee E all this hope, w: dispute. aid that ho was speakingfor Virginia. She emain in the confederacy unless guarantees made for the preservation of her rights. to submit the question ‘ut the constitution ¢ did not unders eR Virginia, meant ‘by sending idle bis Stato, "He had gent e E tf i A Ea hatte bie if depended on the action of Virginia ar eases It wes clear that he and the ‘Virginia differed. He desired peace and the Union; ‘but be had failed a action of th the from Pennsylvania large advanees to conciliation, and by the Senator from Virginia.” The cinia said that he wanted no conces- applauded by the Senator from New Hamp- aud those who were uncompromising |. Also this morning, when the Senator from New York met in such spirit as if modora- tion would prevail. He seemed to be in concert between the extremist#ot Both sides, as the other day Senators ‘on this side refused to vote when. ee of the Senator fram New Hampshire (Mr. ‘k) passed, and then telegraphed to the South that there was no hope, as the republicans voted down the Crittenden resolutions, i iz if u il it was abire (Mr. Hale) ; ‘on that side were Mr. Jouxson, (opp) of Ark., said there was no con- of action. Senators refused to vote because wanted to spe, .of the republicans, and it ident there bed 4 Does wall “never cease of » pen There ope, saw in ° BW todye ae e amendment tha! Why Gongreas bad se poe ‘to -legislate on the subject of do. ‘vitu wi uc ser hese, @xcépt to perform duties in ‘ to fu Tiel ibit the Rave trade, with Adat we we peace. Mr. Hats , (rep.) of N. H., expressed his surprise at shat the Senator . Iinois (Mr. Douglas) had said fm regard tothe bation he showed at what the Se- nator from Vi said. The Virginia Senator said were satisiied withthe con- concesasions This’ showed Beve in tinkering with the constitution, and did not think could make a Detter’ instrument than the one ‘that was drawn by our fathers. He was willl to take the constitution aa it was, and did not think the resolu- tion of avail but for the constitutional Union which fol- Jowed. The best hopes of mankind are freighted in the sbip of Union, and none but madmen will give up and try @new experiment. He had been told that New Englama owas to be sloughed offanyway. If the country could get along without New England, he would say “God biess them.” He paid an cloquent tribute to the enterprise and industry of New England. They might go to the cotton fields of the South, and they would seo that Dut for New England that cotton which they al king would now be a be; It was also said tad tit Northwest was going . Well, “Good-bye,” but give us back our jewels. Give us back the Senator from Ilinois (Mr. Douglas), with his “great principle,” for he belongs to us. If Ohio goes, give us back her “thi orator’’ (Mr. Wade), forfhe belongs to us. Not till men haye lost all recollection will the West leave New England. He gaid the Union would etill remain if this ‘Operation was performed. In answer to the remark that the North the South, he referred to the pestilence at Norfolk in 1865, when Northern people flocked to the assistance of the people there, and the North would do it again if they were called upon. He expressed his gratification that Virginia had initiated the calling of a Convention of the & Himeelf and colleague had asked the Governor of Hampshire to send Commissioners here to meet with ahose of the other States. He (Mr. Hale) would be willing Wo do anything reasonable to he country; but if the Southern States insist upon let them go, and when ahey come back we will kill the fattened calf and rejoice pyer them as a son who wandered alive again. Mr. Wicrait, (opp.) of Texas, then proceeded to speak. He epoke of his love for the constitution and the Union, if the constitution could be administered as framed. Ho ®aid the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) now comes up with hie great specific. If it had not been hat Senator's doctrines the country would now be safe and a democratic President elected. He declared that the South would never submit to coercion, and would never ome back or be satisfied with anything like the Critten- den resolution. He made charges of il! treament and abuse ‘Against the Southern people by the North. The seceding rates claim the right to secede, and will not consider any other question till the government forces and all ‘menaees are withdrawn. The Southern people will not five under a government that secks to degrade them, Bor have anything to do with aparty that degrades wives ‘and mothers toa par with Brigham Young’s women. if the Senator from [llinois wiehes to save the Union let him abandon his doctrines and admit that slaves are rity. Let the government, if it wants to save the jon, Withdraw its troops and make no more menaces, . Doveras said he had but a few words to say in re . He defended the doctrine of “popular sovereignty” as the only doctrine that could save and bring peace to the country. He said that he was willing to meet others half way, and he hoped there was patriotism enough in the country to put down both extremes, “He desired to appeal to the people everywhere to rise in their might and put down the disunion party. Both extremes must be made to give up, a8 he feared there were dis ‘unionists in both sectious of "the country. He would say before high Heaven there were disunionists on thi ride of the chamber and on that, and as many from the North as from the South, in both branches of Congress. He had confidence in the patriotism of the people, even in the New England and cotton States, and hoped yet that the Union would be preserved, and he would say he had reasonson which to predicate this hope. (Ap- 080. astra 1GPALL asked the Senator to state his reasons. Mr. Dovotag said that he saw evidences every day of & disposition to treat en eoeenen with frankness and a & concil it, and if they were not repel \e Soe ei ‘see more of them. If the Senator from Texas will wait it would make him a great help. (Applause. ) Mr. Wicratt said it ‘ng! Ap g ye = that any proposition would satisfy any ‘white tan who had straight Nair south of Mason and Dixon’s line. He objected to all such fudge. He then proceeded to argue against non intervention. Adjourned. House of Representatives, Wasurvotox, Jan. 31, 1861. Mr. Mormuxap, (rep.) of Pa., introduced a bill to pre- vent and punish counterfeiting and the use of private Btamps, labels, trademarks, &c., of mechanics and trades- men. Persons found guilty of doing eo are to be im- prisoned for not more than twelve months and to pay a fine of not move than $3,000, Its consideration was be bo. . Ricas and SrRarron severally presented memo- rials, extensively signed by citizens of New Jersey, an adjustment of the national difficulties. ir. CLARK, (opp.) of Mo., presented a petition from citi- gens of that State, praying for the adoption of the Cra- tenden compromise. Laid on the table and ordered to be printed. THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM KANSAS. Mr. Hixpmay, (opp) of Ark., offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the Judiciary Committee to in uire whether Martin F. Conway, claiming to represent ¢ Btate of Kansas, has been legally and constitutionally elected a representative to Congress from that state, and that said committee report by bill or otherwise. It was agreed to have a night session for debate only. ‘TUE DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATION BILL ‘The House went into Committee of the Whole on the Senate's amendments to the Deficiency Appropriation ‘The Committee on Ways and Means recommended non- concurrence in the Senate's amendment appropriating 000 to ratify the provisional contract with Ambrose ©. Foreaposs Us ccoure tae Unives trates certain, rales. ble privileges in the province of Chiriqul. Mr. Monex, (rep.) of Me., offered proviso, that the contract be not approved until the (nited States be se cured in the supply of coals, Ac., proposed by it, aad protected from failure, and that the United States shall acquire no right of sovereignty in New Granada Or Costa Rica, por transport troops and munitions of war over the territory, unless voluntarily desented to by the govern mente of those countries. Mr. Pumrs made a speech against the appropriation. Before concluding action on the subject, the Committee roge for the purpose of enabling Mr. Adams, of Mass., to make a speech on the report of the Committee of Thirty- three. SYRECH OF MR, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS ON TIE CRIs Mr. Abams, (rep.) of Mass.—Mr. Speaker, in this hour of inexpressible fmport to the fate of unborn millions, 1 would that T could clear from my eyes the film of all bu- man peerions, to see the truth and the right in their Maked, living reality, and with their aid to rise to the grandeur of (he opportunity to do good to my fellow men. ‘There haye been oocanooe when the fiting words, uttered in the true place, Lave helped to right the scale when ‘Wavering towards the ruin of a nation, At no time have they been more nec than now, at no place more re quisite than here. The most waguificent example of self. Government known to history is in imminent dangor of suffering an abrupt mutilaion, neon of the ipitate violence of a few desverate men. 1 purpose to discuss briefly, and I trust with proper calmnnen the caure and the effect of this pro | Well a8 the duty that it entails upon ve. On u the people of the United States were cal teenth time, to give in their vote two highest officers known to the o marked the proceeding with any unusual fe fuctance had been inaniferted in any quarte duty, the proof of which ‘ is that no more ful! expression of was ever made, No complaint of unfairness or was heard. No contested question sprang up ith the single exception of the State of Virginia, f was entertained of the true reflection of the popula @enve in designating the Klectors whove province itis to complete the procees. Not a soul has been bold @nough to deny the fact that, from the origin of the go. ‘Vernment not a tingle election which had been disputed fat all wae ever we fair'y conducted of more unequiv blime epoctacie view ' eally determined by foreigh nat ove or ‘twelve of the States. At the precise spply the doctrine to the people of So ration of their grievances. only to be executing a treasonable project they have becn meditating for twenty yeare. fore, put themeelves without the pale of negotiation. There is not even a minority of the citizens who re cannot overlook the fact, that in duty as faithfully as vention of a single disturb inte violent remonstrance, and dashed forts toapnul all their obligations to Such a step had never before boas Steen, in ‘The same spirit directly manife ftself in rowed about, and it has continued ever since ‘until it has more affected the loyalty of instance had never curred, _ There been several cases i of pee resistance to federal laws. Souta Carolina had erself furmished a memorable one. But here was an ex- ample of resistance to a constitutional election of men. ‘The former may be conducted without necessarily shaking the very foundations of the social system, but the latter at once denies the validity of the only process by which the organic law an ‘be executed at all, To refuse to acknow! the constituted authorities of anation, when successefully carried out, is revolution, and it is called rebellion when it fails under-eyery code of laws known over the globe. It is an appeal to physical force, which depends for its justitication before God and mamonly upon the clear establishment of proof of intolerable’ ty- ranny and oppression. It is sometimes the last reseurce of patriots who fee! themselves impelled to overtbrow a despotism, but oftener the contrivance of despe- rate adventurers who seek for their own private ends to establish one, Had’ the present outbreak seemed to me the consequence of mature deliberation and deep. settled convictions among the le, I should at onee bave despaired of the republic. But, apart from the merely outward indications of haste and of passien tnat attended it,I had other reasons for believing ditferently. During the previous summer, the repr’ “tative candi. date of the most extreme party in i... slaveholding States had labored more than once to declare himself a devoted friend of the Union. Whilst, on the other hand, the distrust in him inspired by the character of his prin- cipal advocates had had the effect of alienating from him numbers, even in his own State, who preferred the secu rity offered to them by the friends of another candidate, brought forward ‘exclusively as the upholder of ‘the Union, of the constitution, and the en. forcement of the laws.’’ The slaveholding States were thus divided between these two influences, neither of them venturing before the people to whisper the theory of disunion, Avery large minority of the aggregated voters sustained the most thoroughly pledged candi tate whilst Teuneseeo and Kentucky gave him their electoral votes; and even the Old Dominion, never known before to waver in the course marked out by her acknowledged and ancient leaders, was geen to transfer her votes to the more loyal side. All these events were not the natural forerunners of premeditated disaffection to the constitu- tional government. They can only be accounted for by presuming a fund of honest attachment to it at bottom, and the inference which I draw is that the feeliugs of a majority of well disposed persons have been suddenly carried away by sympathy with their warmer and more violent friends in South Carolina, so that they have not stopped calmly to weigh the probable consequences of their own precipitation. If I were to need more evidence tw prove to me the absence of deliberate intent, outside of South Carolina, to set aside an election regularly made, Ithink I could find it in the earnestness with which other causes have been set up in justification of resis. tance. It has been alleged that various grievances have been suffered, much oppression bas been endured, and certain outrages have been committed, upon the pope of the slaveholding States, which render their longer stay in the Union impossible, unless conii- dence ean be inspired that some remedies may be applied to stop the evils for the future. They aver that their rights are no longer secure in re- maining with us, and that the alternative left is to withdraw themselves before acquiescence shall have prepared them for ultimate subjugation. They come to us and demand that these complaints shall be listened to, and these apprehensions allayed, before they can consent to farther abide under the anthority of a common head. And here some of my frien is on the right reply, with equal warmth and not less reason, that they are unconscious of having done wrong in electing a President according to the constitution—that they ure not aware of any reat grievances that demand redress, and that they feel disinclined to enter upon any experi: ment to quiet apprehensions Which are, in their opinion, either artificial or ‘maginary. What they appeal to is the constitution as it’ ie, and if obedience to its requisitions .be not ’ voluntarily rendered in any quarter, the only proper remedy is coercion. 1 should, perhaps, be disposed to concur in this view were this a case of deliberate and wilful conspiracy to sub- vert the government. T am not sure that I would not b Carolina, who They ide- Aves have long been known to be generally di neither demand nor expect apy redress or even co: They declare the: They have, there- monstrate. The case is otherwise with the other States. There is evident hesitation and re- luctance in adopting the irrevocable policy of disunion. There is a lingering desire to receive assurances that this step is not absolutely need- ed. Now I, for one, am not ready yet to take the responsibility of absolutely closing the door to reconcilia- tion. I cannot permit myself to forget the warnings that have descended to us from many of the wisest and best statesman and patriots of all time against this rigid and haughty mode of treating great emer discontents. I ie days of our fathers the imperious spirit of Chatham did not feel itself as sacrificing any of his proud dignity by proposing to listen to their grievances. and even to concede to every reason- able demand, long after they bad placed themselves in armed resistance to all the power of Great Britain. Had George the Third listened to his words of wisdom, he might have saved the Deightest Jowel of his crown. He took the opposite course. He denied the existence of grievances, he rejected the olive branch, he insisted upon coercion. And what was the result? History records its verdict in favor of Chatham, and against ‘his king. And who is there in the Mother Country at this day who does not re- gret the blunder, if he does not condemn the motive of the monarch? When the great grandson of that same king, on his late visit to this capital, so handsome]y made his pilgrimage to the tomb of the arch rebel of that time, do you imagine that his countrymen and future subjects would have applauded the act if they still believed that the stiff backed old king had been yo in shutting the door of reconciliation? For my part, Mr. Speaker, 1 ata more inclined to accord with that philosophical states man, Edmund Burke, who, during the game struggle, was not afraid to bring forward his plan of conciliation with America, and in the elaborate epeech which he made in its defence he used the following language, not entirely inappropriate to these times:— Now, In euch unfortunate quarrels among tho component rts of a great political union of communities, I can scarce. Frcouceive ‘anything more completely imprudent than for the head vt tbeemplre to Insiat that if any privilege is pleat ed against his will or hia acts, that bis whole authority is de. nied, thstantly to proclaim rebellion, to beat iq arms, aud to put the offending provinces under ‘the ban. | Will ny sir, very soon teach the provinces to make no distinctions their part%Will it not teach themfhat the government against which,e claim of liberty {s tantamount to high treason, 18 a government in which submission ix equivalent to #laveryt Mr. Speaker, it is notiny custom to jean much ‘upon authority. As a general thing it to me to pass for more than {t is worth. But there are persons who are always more or less influenced by the source from which anything comes, and who are better di to believe in the testimony of a witness two centuries old than if thé tame reasoning were issued from the lips of the best of living contemporaries. To euch | will com- mend A passage drawn froin the most profound of British statesmen and philosophers, Francis Bacon:— ‘Concerning the materials of seditions, it is @ thing well to be considered, for the surest way to prevent seditious, if the times do bear it, is to take away the matter of them) for if there be fuel prepared, {t is hard to tell whence the spark shall come that sball set it on fire. As for discontentments, they are in the politic body ike to humors in the natural, which are apt to gaiher @ preternatural heat and toinflame; and let no prince measure the danger of them by this, whether they be just or unjust, for that were to tmagin le to be Wo reasonable who do often spurn their own or yet by this, whether the griets whe upon they rise be in Tact great or stall, for they are the most dangerous discontentments where the fear is greater than the feeling. “Dolendi muxters, timendi non item.” Besides, in {oppressions tbe same things that provoke the patience fo withal mete the courage; but in fears it is notes, “Neher Jet any prince or State be secure concerning discontenta because they have been often, or have been long, and yet no iI hath ensued, for as it is irue that every vapor of doth not turn {nto ® storm, so it is nevertheless true tha! storms, though they blow over divers tines, yet may fall at last; and as the Spanish breaketh at last by the weakest pull Such deep sagacity as this convinces mo, if I ever doubted, that the w: peace tn times of discord is not always found b ng to listen to complaints. i differ, then, with some of my rigid friends on this point 1 preter sider grievances, were it but to be gure that they haye no just foundation—much prove to merit tion for their reaso notion of the dui ig to watch the growth of offencer and not to n Liew to despise them. 1 have, therefore, faith d,in my bumble way, to comprehend the na the ciscontents actu prevailing, and to judge of the extent to wh they justify the resort to so vi the overthrow of a government. all that baa been said in cot easily embrace the topics of ¢ to wit— roverb noteth’ well, “The cord in some of operating to discourage the recovery of ‘Seromd—The denial of equal righ! The apprehension of of politi nished te that if these are all that endan seommon bond of assoc en the States, opinion in similar sacrifice to mere abstractions was ever before made among reaeoniog men. Let me And fret, proceed briefly te analyze them one by one of th Personal Liberty laws ‘Their origin is well known to have been in the enactinent ef the last F law. Their true purpose is to prot from being drag ed tinder its etringent provi out trial and without oteore, = irredeomst r If in attempting to secure this object rome of the have overstonmed the line #0 far as (0 appear to obste the reclamation of fugitive elaves, surely a little may be pardoned to the spirit of liberty, justly wounded by the hareh and revolting features of the la So far from be- constructed with any view to effect ite object, that has always seemed to me to have the appear: purposely effensive in order to iasure that complaint against the free ht grow ont of it. Mr. Speaker, if there be one Te ena te People of the United 6 mn ernest ree etet OF legislating over much. In our forme Wat on orts of difficultion we are apt to manne moder of ‘bener. & ee ent, the habite catablih’ gocinl barriers apuitee ee oe od jn constructed statut a which eted thie Lappens beow cause they have too much. A ¢ollision with a popular lice, however ill-founded, annul the most 0 »! Sa pews © Buck a ony, shown there was not ‘Thus i- happens that the codes of all im obs0- aco eee x ood rapeated of la’ fe Ging tatiow, the a for C6, the rate “ot “interet for the we meat endeavors to probi dea vis 14 againet ionocent -couriter to the sym@pathies of the people. Jt is no matter men runs how'many laws you make, the more crue! tl are the Jess will you be likely to find them efficient This is a law of ‘hemin feeling, which every man made with a heart can readily comprehend. Jt js this which makes Personal’ Liberty laws of no use also. The fugitive is never recovered because a ple -who think it cruel to return him send him forward; and not because he fas any imagined protection inthe statute book. If, then, you hope to counteract this tendency, the right way to do it ts’not to ingrease, but to seften the severity of your law. Neither will it avail *much to claim the repeal of Pei Liberty laws, which have pever been of practical use to anybody, bond or free. This would obly leave you just co nae you were. ‘The difficulty is in the nature of reclamation. If you ‘are Proposing to dissolve the Union because that difficulty ‘cannot be removed, the natural question will spring up, whether the right of reclamation, in some shape specifically guaranteed to you in the —_ act of go- verhment, is not worth keeping at all. Of courge you will let it go if’ you succeed in separation. If you do, im my enable opinion you will never get soything like security again. Your mistake seems to me to have been tne dle- sire to use it too fiercely. The measure now proposed by the committee, is based on a principle of justice, the recognition of which is calculated to soften’ the 4 nance to the law in the free States, and to a cor - ing extent to facilitate the recovery of fugitives. But I frankly confess, Mr. Speaker, my unwillingness to par- ticipate in the responsibility for this kind ¢f legislation. 1 am willing to leave the question of modification or otherwise to the representatives of the border States, who are most interested in it as a practical regulation. With (us in Massachusetts, I am free to say that I think both the Fugitive Slave law of 1850, and the Personal Liberty law copeequent upon it, are obsolete on the statute books. If we are quarrelling about either or both, we make a ground of dispute out of a mere abstraction. 1 ask the slave- holders, if you are going to dissolve the Union about it on the one side, how are you likely to improve your chances of recovery by that on the ? Lesk my own friends, if you are willing to stake the Union upon adherence to your counter-legislation, are you not risk- ing substance for an abstraction, sacrificing a beneficent system to uphold a statute which has never prevented the recovery of asingle slave, nor secured the liberty of a single freeman? And now I come to the second, which has been calied the most serious cause of dispute of all, but which seems to me more of an abstraction than either: I mean the foomplaint of exclusion from the Territories. And first, as to the matter of fact. Who excludes the slaveholders with their slaves? Have they not obtained an opinion from the Supreme Court which will in effect override any and every effort of Congrees against them? They can, if they choose, now go wherever they like on the public do- main, There is no majority in Congress itself to prevent their going, even if ithad the power. Why do they not hat right? The reason is plain—it is not for their in- terest to go 80 far North. They will not leave tho rich bottom lands still = for the profitable cultivation of the cotton plant in the South to go to a comparatively arid region further off. The slaveholder follows his own interest in,applying his labor in that way that will yield the best regult. If he were compelled by law to remove to any part of the territory from ie be now complains that he 1s excluded, he would be apt ¥o regard the decree as a greater outrage than any he now enumerates. The Jaw of political economy regulates this matter much betier than any epecific statute. It guides this species of labor to the most suitable place, and that place is not the territo- ry of the United States. I understand the validity of this reasoning to be so far conceded that the aggrieved parties are willivg to surrender all of it that lies north of the old Compromise line to a perpetual prohibition of slavery therefrom. This limits their aint cf exclusion to the remaining region gouth of that line. If we exclude the Indian reserva- ticns, which are covered by solemn treaties, this cs nothing but the tract of land which goes under the nes of New Mexico and Arizona. It is from this tract that they complain of exclusion. Tt is for this tract that they demand a constitutional guarantee of protection to ry, and in case of refusal they are ready to dissoive Now, I would ask, how stands the fact? This ‘Territory bas been organized more than ten years. It bas been freely opened to slaveholders with their slaves during all that period. a has enjoyed all the pro tection that a government favorable to it in all its branches has been abie to extend over it. The Territorial organization has nursed the bantling by every artificial process, even to the concoction of a terrible slave code, which lias but one obstacle to its exercise, and that is the absence of all desire to execute it, as well as the want of slaves to whom to aj it. So it has been stretched over upon white people. What more could have been done for protection if your consti- tutional amendment bad been in operation? What more could be done if it were adopted now? New Mexico is under the shield of the Supreme Court. cannot prolibit slavery there in the face of that tribunal. New Mexico has now twenty-two slaves on a surface of over two hundred thousand equare miles of her extent, and of these only twelve are domiciled; the remainder are but transient residents. New Mexico shows, then, at this moment all that ten years of protection of slavery has made her. She has a slave code and twelve slaves; end yet you want more Protection; and you threaten a dissolution of the Union if you do not get it—forgetting, I Cr green that if you execute your Ubreat, instead of getti ng ere you may lose all that you have already obtained. If New Mexico has gained only one slave a year during all the time you have had to put them there, it is scarcely likely that the number will ia- crease after your protecting care shall have been totally withdrawn. I think it needs no further iment to show that the question, whether this shall or not be slave territory, is like that alluded to by the Roman poet. “de lana caprina;” or, in other Of getting wool out of a goat. I say, then, in answer to the d of a constitutional guarantee of protection to slavery in New Mexico, that you are asking for what in substance you enjoy “already, and what is good for nothing to you if you get it. You will not go with your slaves to New Mexico, for the excellent reason that you e doing better with them nearer home. Yet stili,as this is all the territory left, about which there is any contention between us, the Committee come forward with an intermediate proposal to settle it_ once for all by making itaState. This puts an end to further strife about prohibition or protection. The people of the Ter- ritory have already the right granted to them on the statute book of determining the question for themselves. You have on your side possession, which they say makes nite points in the law; we have on ours the aridity of the surface unfavorable to all forms of agricultural '’ and therefore unpropitious to slavery. Let us abide by result now which is sure to come sooner later. 1, for one, am free to say, I do not And hete let me quote a remark made to me ally on this subject by one of the gentlemen on 6 oppoeite side of the Committee. He objected to this proposition because he said it put us both in false posi- tions. I showld be censured at home for yoting to admit a slave State, whilst he should meet with similar treat- ment fo Reoryeny by admit another free State. Now it seemed to me, on the contrary, that the very even na- ture of this chance was exactly that which would justify both of us in our respective action. Yet, I confess T should be very unwilling to enter into the proposition ubless we can all agree to regard it as putting to rest for- ever a troublesome cause desire to the of dissension. I have uo vote for it it be not acceptable to other ide. But even if they should tit, I think the offer ought at least to extinguish ry future complaint about the exclusion of ve holders from the Territories, and every pretence that the refusal to grant protection is good cause for their present violent course. The dissolution of the Union would ecarcely tend to make more slaves in the Territories of the United States. I very much doubt whether it will eplarge the number anywhere, Be that as it may, if it be thought better to let New Mexico remain in ite present condition, even though it be a @laveholding Territory beyond all present power of change by Congress, I am content. On all other accounts, excepting as a settlement vf etrifes. I should regard this as the most advisable course. But in either event is see no objection to expurging from its statute book, under the authority expressly reserved ongress, of that portion of it so well described by my friend from Ohio. I cannot imagine that any calm, right mit man, of either party, could object to it. In pe tting its continuance for a moment we only con- teelyes, But now comes a further claim in this tim, We are called, not omy to guarattee ery within our own Territories, but we must provide nu those of our neighbors before we get them. I recollect that two anguished to consult with us any more from the we refused to enter into this matter, I believe asentered by them upon the journals. if red to be somewhat singular that the ation should cease just at this uid be driven to a final separation we did not like to declare in the and all times an binent upon foreign States, and that to that end makivg a preliminary rule of arrangements t their institutions without the smallest regard to disposition or convenience of those who may be citi- peatthe time. In my symplicity | had imagined it a fundamental principle of all negotiations to let the le of other countries speak for themselves in regard | to their own affaire, I had supposed they might have a word to aay about so material a question as the tntrodne- | tion of elavery. All these consid been overlooked, and we are t be dissolved if we refuse to | chat will pr { Sonora; or Coahuila on—when we get them. In or thia proceeding will look to that the British tion what sort to compreh let me suppose entertain the ques. y should enact respect in the gold region of 1 parallel, hereafter to be tas protty comical 1 be further inform. @ fixed in its determination to , ut Britain declined to Dject, what would then be our amare. tT sce little difference between this picture present ourselves when we fall to way we shall disporo of our neigh hen there is no particular Have not we got diff eaent enor: he necessity of puz t are without? [can this idea of Tor. even amidst diate he ider this ev nt? ¥ and that which we ling about th uful realitie t not, T ask ye 2 extraordina The third and 6 meet Bing i tH Hi ll <b i i : i Fs £ E i E } [ policy cd of a8 dangerous. The terror comes from language of particular individuals. Mr. such a one said 80 and 60 in a speech; another man, an editor, had written so and so in his n r; dr. Senator Seward had spoken somewhere of an ‘ ible con- ict,” and of invasion at some time or other designed om tlavery; 80, by way of proving him a false or and’ themselves wise remonstrants, I ypose the ‘ieved ties no r tot tttempt to Hepress. the “conhict,”™ but raihor is > to invite myasion in good earnest by it themselves, So Mr. Lincoln, our President said in ‘uinois, some time y reached and passed.” charged with bavi “that a crisis would had been 0 bold as to quote the words of an authority betore whose fname all jetian uations bow—‘‘A house divided against Itself cannot stand.” Whereupon the complainants proceed to disprove the propositions by im- mediately bringing om a crisis, and, instead of waiting for the Louse $0 a, by setting vigor work to pull it down about our ears. And all this from fear lest these predictions should be verified hereafter. It has been farther, alleged as a grievance, admiesion of new free States, the time may come ut ‘will exceed three quarters of the they will have it in their power to adopt ; then there ig reason to fear that the; the domestic insti- tutions of the Btates. course, the blicans will at once initiate a plan of emanoipation, and it of this impending danger that the slaveholiing States prefer to avoid it by diesolving the Union. It is difficult at all times to reason about imaginary dangers. I think it was Mr. Jefferson who remarked {that ‘‘much of the life of every man is troubled with the apprehension of things that never come to pass.” But surely we have no ra- tional cause to antici the admission of twenty-seven more States within any moderate ulation a ee oe Yet it will require Lm. 4 ° fur- Di necessary proportion, out slave States, to incorporate amendments inte the consti- even tho suggestion of tbe possiblity Gf thet propeaal af even tho suggestion possibility such amendment in any case should have been made in such a quarter. Surely there are some things which, for its own security if for no other reason, it may fairly be presumed that not one of the would ever originate, and one of the most essential would be any idea of a rect interference witb the internal economy of a sister State. 1 confess, Mr. er, that I should be very jealous, a8 a citizen of Massachusetts, of aay attempt ‘on the part of Virginia, for example, to propos an amendment of the constitution designed to re- scind or abolish the Bill of Rights prefixed to our own form of governmént. Yet I cannot see why such a proposition would be more unjustifiable than any counter proposition to-abolish slavery. In mastering the primary elements of our form of government, the first and fundasmental idea is the reservation to the people of the respective States of every power of regulating their own affairs not specifically surrendered in the constitu- tion. The security of the State governments depends upon the fidetity with which this principle is observed. Even the intimation of any such interference as 1 have men- tioned by way of example, could not be made in earnest without at once shaking the entire fouadation of the whole confederated Union. No man shall ex me in jealousy of affection for the State rights of Massachusetts. ‘So far ag Iremember, nothing of this kind was ever thought of heretofore, and | see no reason to apprehend that what has not happened thus far will be more likely to happen hereafter. But if the time ever comes when it does oc- cur, I shall believe the dissolution of the system to be much more certain than J do at this moment. For these reasons | cannot imagine that there is the smallest foun- dation for uneasiness about the intentions of any con- siderable number of men in the free States to interfere, in any manner whatever, with slavery in the States, much less by the hopeless mode of amending the constitution. To me it looks like panic—pure panic. How, then, is it to be treated? Isit to be neglected or ridiculed? Not atall. Ifa child in the nur- sery be frightened by the idea of a spectre, common humanity would prompt an effort by kindness to assuage the alarm; but in cases where the same feel pervades the bosoms of multitudes of men, this imaginary eyil grows up at once intoa gigantic reality, and must be dealt with as such. It is at all times difficult to legislate against a possibility. The committee have reported a proposition intended to meet this case. It is a form of amendment of the constitution, which in substance takes away no rights whatever which the free States ever should attempt to use, whilst it vests exclusively in the slave States the right to use them or not as they shall thivk proper, the whole treatment of the subject to which ‘they relate being conceded to be a matter of common interest to them exciusively within their jurisdiction, and subject to their control. A time may arrive, in the course of years, when they will themselves desire some act of interference ina friendly and beneficent spirit. If 0, they have the power re- served to them of initiating the yery form in which it would be most welcome. If not, they have asecurity, so long as this government sball endure, that no sister State shall dictate any change against their will. I have now considered all the alleged grievances which have thus far been bi ‘ht to our attention—first, the Personal Liberty laws, which never freed a slave; second, exclu- sion from a territory which slaveholders will never de- sire to occupy; third, apprebension of an event which will never take place. For the sake of these three causes: of complaint, all of them utterly without practi- cal regult, the slaveholding States, unquestionably the weakest section of this great confederacy, are volun- tarily and precipitately surrendering the realities of solid power woven into the very texture of a government that now keeps nineteen millions of freemen willing to tole- — in one — same, institutions » but for that, would meet with no more sym rem than they now do in the remainder of te civilized world, For my own part, I must declare that, even sup- ‘ievances to be more real than I rep- the measures of the committee dis- pose alleged resent them, I th pose of them effectually and forever. They contribute Girectly all that can be legitimately done by . and they recommend it to the legisiatures of tho to accomplish remainder. Why, then, is it that harmony not restored? The answer is, that you are not satisfled with this settlement, however ‘complete. You must have some guarantees ‘in the con- stitution; you must make the protection and extension of slavery in the Territories now existing, ‘‘and here- after beg! aang a eardinal doctrine of our great charter. Without that you are determined to dissolve the Union. How stands the case, then? Woe offer to settle the question finally, in all of the present territory that you , by giving you every chance of establish- ing Slavery that you have any right to require of us. You decline to take the offer, because you fear it will do |. Slavery will not go there. But if that be you no true, what is the use of asking for the estion any- how, much less in the constitution? Why requtre pro- tection where you will have to protect? All you appear to desire it for is New Mexico, Nothing, else ig left. Yet you will not accept New Mexico at once, because ten years of experience has proved to you that protection has been of no use thus far. But if #0, how can you expect that it will be of much more use hereafter, and to make {t worth dissolving the Union about? But if we pass to the other condition, is it any more reasonable? gone Tag Bal al because we can- not agree upon the mode of disposing of our neighbors’ land Are we to break up the Union of these jy C8 mented by #0 many years of common sufferings and re- splendent with so many years of common glory, because it is insisted that we ehould incorporate into what we re- gard as the charter of our freedom a proclamation to the crvilized world that we intend ew the territory of other nations, wherever we can do it, for the purpose of putting into Jt certain institutions ‘which some of us disapprove, and that, too, whether the people in- babiting that terri themselves. approve of it or not? 1 am almost inclined to believe that they who first did it must have done eo for the sake of presenting a condi- tion which they knew beforehand must be rejected, or which, if ;, mnust humiliate us in the dust for- ever. In point of fact, this proposal covers no question of immediate moment which may not be settled by ano- ther and less obnoxious one. Why is it, then, persevered in and the other rejected? The answer is obvious—you want the Union dissolved. You want to make It impos- sible for honorable men to become reconciled. If it be indeed so, then on you, and you alone, shall rest the re- sponsibility of what may follow. If the Union be brokea up, the reason why it med shall remain on record forever. It was because you rejected one form of settlin, a question, which might be offered and accopted wil hotor, in order to insist upon another, which you knew we could not accept without disgrace. I answer for my- self only when I say, tbat if the alternative of the salva- tion of the Union be only that the fos ahd the United States shall, before the Christian of the earth, plant in broad letters upon the print of their chartor of republican government the of slave propagan ism over the remainder of the countries of the world, I will not consent to brand myself with what I deem such dis- grace, let the consequences be what they may. But it is ‘said that this answer closes the door of reconciliation, and the slaveholding States will secede. And what then’ This baings me to the last point which I desire to touch to-day—the proper course for the government to pursue in the face of these dyfficulties. Some of the friends with whom I act have not hesitated to exprees themeelves in favor of coercion, and they have drawn very gloomy pictures of the fatal consequences to the prosperity and security of the whole Union that must epeue. my own sake, I am glad that! do not par- take so largely in these fears. I see no obstacle to the regular continnance of the government in not less than twenty States, and perhaps more, the inhabitants of which baye not in a moment been deprived of that peca. ier practical wisdom in the management of their affairs, which is the seorct of their past success. Several new States will before long bo ready to take their places with ws, and make good in part the loss of the old ones, The mission of furnishing ‘a great example of free government to the nations of the arth will atill be in our hands, impaired, I admit, but not destroyed; and I doubt not our power to accomplish it yet in spite’ of the temporary drawback, Even the probletn of coercion will go on to solve itself without our aid; for if the sentiment of disunion become so far uni versal and pern t in the dissatiefied States as to show no prospect of good from resistance, and there be no acts cf aggression attempted on their part, I will not say that I may not favor the idea of some arrangement of a peace {ul Character, though T do not now gee the authori ty under which it can be originated. The new confederacy can scarcely be other than a secondary Power, It can never be a maritime State, It will begin with the neceesity of keeping eight millions of its popu lation to watch four millions, and with the duty of guard ing, againet the egress of the latter, overal thousand miles of an exposed border, beyond which theregmill bo no right of acclamation of the result of a similar -Bxperi ment. 1 cannot, in my own mind, have a moment's doubt. At the last session I ventured to place on record ip thie house a prediction by which [ must abide. the effect of the future on my engacity be what it have not yet seen any reason to doubt its accura peat it. The experiment will ignomin'-ust Dut there are exceptions to the adoption of th fail peaceful ag ps not be wise to overlook. be violent and wanton attacks upon tbe cbtcd mate, or Let govornmeny Sea demands for immediate redress can be av ¥ {cishould'be aiiemptod of the regular chat | i may bave been ish- ed, W pln, a When | heard Ragen: oon from Virginia, the other day, 80 bravely and so foretl urging their manly arguments in support of the constitution ‘and the enforcement of my heart involuntarily bounded towards them, engaged in & common cause. them, said I myself, but accept the oftered settlement of the differences that remain between us, some fair basis like that by the committee, , who yet believe that ‘the Union must be preserved,” from ‘Gabe nen. our common forces to effect it? When the cry goes out that the ship is in danger of sinking, the first duty of board, no matter what nis ticular vo- Fees ke her afloat. What! shall it be said that we waver in the view of those who begin trying to expunge the sacred memory of tho July? Shall we wip. am to obliterate or stulti labors patriots wi magnificent edifice upon base of gui political the human liberty? Shall we surrender the fame of Washing- ton and Laurens, of Gadsden and the Lees, of Jefferson and Madison, and of the heroes wi are imperishably per ? Never—never | pore against what scems to me like moon, the barrier of a single feeble remonstrance. But in any event it shall never be caid of my share in the action of this hour of danger, that it has been guided by vindictive passions, or narrow considerations of per- sonal or party advantage. I well know what I hazard among many whose good opinion has ever been + of the sunlight of my existence, in following what I hold to be @ higher duty. Whilst at any and at all times I shall labor to uphold the Cine 3 iples of pany without which this.grand system our fathers seem to be a mockery and a show, I shall equally strive to give no just \d_to enemies and traitors to the circle of mischief hag bans A do. Although not very fre- quently indulging in tl ‘of adevotion to the with pas wiopp i deems it aes to its safet, with a y m mos! y Twill Nenture’ to id that no man, over the boundless extent of our dominion, has more reasons for inex- tinguishable attachment to it than myself. It is inter- woven in my affections with the faithful labors in its support of two generations of my race, it is blended with a not inconsiderable personal stake in its contjnuity, it is mingled with my earnest prayers for the wi those who are treading after me, and, more than all these, it colors all my visions of the beneficent spread of republican institutions, as well in America as over the rest of the civilized world. If, then, so eat a calamity as a division is about to fall us if shall be hastened by no act of mine. It shall come from the wilful passions of infatuated men, who demand it of us to destroy the great principles for which our fathers sti led in life and in death, to stain our standard with symbol of human oppression, and to degrade us in the very hour of our victory, before our countrymen, before all thenations of the civilized world, and before God. Rather than this, ‘Jet the heavens fall.” My duty is performed. ‘THE DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATION BILL. The House — went into committee on the Deficiency bill, fe the discussion of the Chiriqui amendment was resumed. Mr. Sickies, (opp.) of N. Y., advocated it on the ground of great national, commercial and economic ad- vantages, as it seemed a new and practical route to tho Pacific of immense importance, considering the exor- bitant charges and monopoly of the Panama Railroad mpany. erie House took a recess till seven o'clock, EVENING SESSION. SPEECH OF MR, FARNSWORTH ON THE CRISIS, Mr. Farsswortm, (rep.) of Ill., said—We have fallen on evil times. There was danger of a dismemberment of the confederacy. This none could deny. The time was when the true patriot would sacrifice himself for his country. Patriotism was now made of different stuff, Instead of immolating himself, he has but to shift his principles with every change of political wind. Martyrs used to be burnt at the stake—now all they have.to do to acquire the crown of martyrdom is to burn their princi- ples. We see forts and other property seized in the South, which so much dreads coercion. But he did not know anybody proposing to coerce a State. He did not know whether the government could coerce a State. He had seen members of Congress swear by everything good to support the constitution, and then deliberately set to work plotting treason. It he had such men before a jury of Illinois, with an in- dictment for Reriary, he would send every mother’s son of them ro penitentiary for that crime. And yet these gentlemen talked of patriotism and chivalry. that the eploan party props lnterfor with ave repul y fore with slave- ry in the States and Dis of Columbia. In reply toa question of Mr. Simms, he said it was the purpese of the cer vy party to maintain freedom in the Territories wi ere the statute of sla’ is not established. He meant by voting to suspend the in order to admit Mr. Blake's résolution last session, just what Washin, meant when gton he said his vote should not be wanting to abolish slaver: here; and he hoped the time would arrive for rid- District of Columbia of the stain and curse of sla- was introduced he would remed} a oor the seceding States for their com- pislote will mega te and heighten rather than les- sen them. hoy are ep | on suicide. He was to the recommendations the Committee of irty- three. He would not give a single inch of vantage ground to slavery it does not now . Should New Mexico be admitted as a slave State, she might a year after retire from the Union. It was time we had a settlement; but he wanted no cheating round the board. The Lor knew we had trouble h out of the old Missouri line; let us have no more. ‘as it the duty of the re- publicans to disgrace and humiliate themselves by mak- ing concessions and compromises of principles to men with arms in hands against the ment—men who have ingulted our flag—taken forcible possession of our property, and are coercing the government instead of th> ernment coercing them? ‘as it becoming to do this in order that a President constitutionally elected might be here peaceably ina ¥ Elected by twelve omet ee he would not surrender one jot or tittle of the principles on which he was elected. Mr. Avery, (opp.) of Tenn., rose for the purpose of set- ting his State right ‘and to reply to the extraordinary and unnatural of his colleague (Mr. Etheridge), which ‘was culogized by the Tribune, inatt! Gazelle and other organs of that party, which stand 0 to the South. He would not say his received a contingent fee of a high place in the councils of those whom he defended; but he would say, in his judgment, the man born nurtured on Southern soil, who, in a crisis like this, champions the cause of the enemies of the South, is forgetful of the interest of the Southern i @ maintained that the charges . His colleagu the republicans are in the main false, and that the Southern le have run wild with excitement owing to m: esentations of the republican party. He ‘Mr. Avery) [peed to show that the South have suf- fered wrong by legislation which must be righted, and in this connection referred to the resolutions of the Ten- neseee ire, to show that she, too, will resort to disunion unless constitutional guarantees for slavery shall be given to all the Southern States. The people of Tennessee will be satisfied with nothing less than the Crittenden proposition. In conclusion, he said, it was the duty of Tennessee to unite her destiny with the seceded States. Mr. Nmiacx, (opp.) of Indiana, believed something could yet be done which would sooner or later bring bac! the seceding States, Everything consistent with honor thould be resorted to with ‘a view of restoring harmony and peace. Meantime, however, he was in favor of a vigorous enforcement of the laws. number of members present during the evening averagod about a dozen, ‘The a wepe few and the proceedings remark- ably dull. Air. Eparrron, (rep.) of Ohio, argued that the present troubles arose’ from the fell spirit of slavery. | The South have long cont the government and made every department of it sectional, She had been ressed with patronage. If guaran. tecs are to given, he demanded they should be given in the name of freedom. He would not compro- mise. He had no faith that the Union could stand any longer than it minietored to slavery. He would not com- promige, beacuse slavery was an outrage against God and ‘an insult to humanity, Mr. Hammrox, (opp) of Texas, obtained the floor, when the House adjourned COMMISSIONERS TO THE CONVENTION. Covance, Jan, 31, 1861. The following are the Commissioners appointed and confirmed by the Senate to-day:—Mesers, Chase, Ewing, 8. C. Wright, Groesbeck, V. B. Honlow, Reiibon Hitch cock F. T. Backus. WASHINGTON Pxovipeser, Jan. 81, 1961 Gov. Sprague bas appointed the following Commission- ers to the Washington Convention —Chief Justice Ames’ Alexander Duncan, Gov. Hoppin, George H. Browne, Samuel G. Arnold. Hannisnone, Jan. $1, 1861. ‘The Governor has appointed as commissioners to meet those of Virginia at Washington, on the 4th of February, Wm, M. Meredith, Thomas White, James Pollock, David Wilmot, Thomas F. Franklin, Andrew W. Leomis and Wm. MeKennan, The three first named have accepted; the other four have not been heard from. Sr. Lows, Jan. 31, 1861. ‘The House to-day passed a reaolution appointing Waldo P. Jobnson, Judge Hough, Col. Doinphan, Judgo Buckner ond John D, Coulter Commissioners to tho Washington Convention, The Senate immediately concurred in the resolution, and the Governor was requestes to notify the Commiseioners without delay of their appointment, Crsemnati, Jan, 31, 1861. ‘The Legislature of Indiana has authorived the ( enor to appoint Commissioners to the Waehington Gonyoution The names will be announced to-morrow Atnany, Jan. 31, 1861. ‘42 long looked for Convention assembled at Tweddle ‘Hail this morning. There was @ large attendance, and a greet many old men who have not participated in the polities of the State for a long time. It is, in fact, abody of able men, taking it as a whole, and the best looking democratic Convention that I have ever witnessed in the Btate. ‘The Tammany and Mozart men were busy throughout the morning upon their special claims, each urging ‘that they should be admitted, Tammany alone; but the Mozarters were willing to share the honor with the Tammanyites, Clancy, Sweeny, Purdy and Belmont were especially busy on the part of Tammany, and were determined that their rights should be recognised. But it was found that the country delegates were unwilling te turn Mozart out ip the cold. They were therefore compelled to submit to & compromise, by admitting both sets and declaring Tam- many regular. This programme would have been put through had it not been for the vascillation and shifting of Sanford E. Church, who rode over al parliamentary usages in his action as tempore Chairman, But through him the Mozarters succeeded in getting the matter in the shape that they desired it, and, by a direct ‘vote upon striking out the regularity of Tammany, they were carrying everything before them, when there was @ request made to substitute a resolution declaring that while the Convention did not wish to decide upon the regularity of either, yet in view of the fact that they bad not assembled for partisan{purposes, they would admit both delegations. This was carried by acclamation, when the Tammany delegation withdrew for a consulta- tien, and did not make their appearance before the Convention took @ recess. At one time there was every indication of a storm and a general row. The Mozart generals were moving about the hall, watching the different delegates as they voted, and whenever any prominent person voted on the Mozart side there was a general demonstration of applause by them. Neither Millard Fillmore nor Seymour answered to their names. ‘It was apparent from the commencement of the morn- ing seesion that the Mozarters had the best of the Tam- manyites on the question. The speech of the tempore chairman, on taking his seat, foreshadowed the same position that I stated the Con- vention would in my despatch in Wednesday’s HERALD, and the responses that his remarks met with showed very conclusively that it met the feelings of the Oon- vention. The Tammany delegation had a lengthy consultation over the question whether they would take part in the deliberations of the Convention or issue an address of their own to the people. Mr. Ti.peN made an earnest appeal for them not to be hasty, but, for the magnitude of the question which they had come here to consider, to go back into the Conven- tion and take part in its deliberations. A majority of the delegation looked upon the decision as reviving the old barnburner fight of 1848, and declare that the adherants to the Buffalo platform were the prime movers against them, and would not for a moment con- sider the proposition. They took a direct vote on re- turning to the Convention, which resulted in ten in favor and forty-four against. The following are the ten who voted in favor of returning:—Mesars, Belmont, Law, Tilden, Cooper, Hardy, J. J. Reiley, Hoff- man, Hurlbut and J. Murphy. But all agreed to abolish the decision of the majority. Having thus decided not to take part in the proceedings of the Convention, they met at tha Delevan and prepared an address to the people, rehearsing the whole question, also reviewing the present agitated state of the country, taking strong grounds against coercion. They now declare war to the knife on the Regency, determined not to ask or give quar- ters. They are in great spirits, and declare that this is the beginning of the war against the Regency. One of their points is that the Convention was called to order by Cagger, presided over by Church, and manipulated by Richmond. The Tammany delegation is the strongest that ever came to a State Convention, and states that she had the dis- tinet pledge of the Regency that they should be recog- nised. Mozart was much weaker in the character of her delegates, and Wood’s radical doctrines make many who voted against dividing the question regret that they did not vote the Tammany delegation equally in. ‘The Tammany men are full of pluck, and consider war against the Regency a very good issue to go before the People on. If the fight goes on it wili draw out all party animosities and virtually inaugurate a reconstruction of parties. As evidence of the cheat, it is understood Sickles was telegraphed by Cagger not to come on, as they wanted to give Tammany another lick. The Mozarters are enjoying what they consider a tri- umph, in whiskey and other warlike decoctions. A movement is on foot to-night to get the Tammany delegates back in the Convention, but it Jooks as if they would not yield. ‘This fight is the great excitement and for the time eclipses the Senatorial issue. If it shall result in the downfall of the Regency good will come unexpectedly out of Nazareth. _ ‘The feature of theafternoon session was thespeech of Beymour,a very able effort, but almost wholly a eulogy ‘on the South—too much so to accomplish any change in the Northern mind, where it is needed. : The Committee on Resolutions, through Wm. H. Lad- low, chairman, will report to the Convention to morrow, in substance, the following resolutions:— First, declaratory of the present revolutionary state of affaire, without placing the blame anywhere. Seocnd, that civil war is no remedy for the troubles, but that conciliation and compromise are the only and true remedies which will reach and cure the disease. Third, they request the #egislature to submit at ap early day the Crittenden proposition to the people. These resolutions will be unanimously passed. Mr. Titden, of Tammany Hall, joins in the report, al- though the Tammany delegation voted to withdraw from the Convention, and, as representatives of the New York democracy, to issue an addrfbs to the people and a declaration of war against the Regency. The Tammany men meet again in the morning, and will then adjourn sine die. PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONVENTION. ALBANY, Jan. 31, 1861. The Convention assembled at eleven o’¢lock at Tweddie- Hall. At half: past cleven Prrer Caccrr called the Convention to order on the part of the State Committee. Mr. Drices, of New York, nominated ex-Governor Church, of Orleans, as temporary Chairman. Carried with loud applause. On taking the chair Mr. Cuuncn said:— GexTLEMEN OF THR ConvENTION—I return to you my sin- cere thanks fer the honor conferred on me in selecting me to preside temporarily over the deliberations of Convention. Although we have been called members of a@ political organization, we hat here as political partisans, or for the ad’ party purpose whatever. Our beloved country is Poingat peril, and we baveassembied, I trust, in a spirit of patriotism and fraternal regard, to contribute some- thing by advice and influence in ‘restoring peace to the country and preserving and perpetuating this heritage, bequeatned to us by our Revolutionary sires. 1 veg to invoke, gentlemen of the Convention, on part, that spirit of conciliation and forbearance ‘which animated our fathers whet they laid the foundation of our government, and which should ever characterize the roceedings of those who are aged ge ly a purpose, Gentlemen ‘of t ty conven ion, what ie your further pleasure? . The following temporary Sesretaries were appointed:— Henry McClusky, of Kings; John A. Griswold, of Rensse- laer; Dr. A. White, of Cayuga; H. A. Reeves, of Suffolk; k. C. Perrin, of Kings. Judge Gray, of Chemung, expressed the hope, before proceeding with the roll cail, or deciding upon contested seats, that no delegate sent here by a constituency wil? be exciuded, All were aware that in the city of New York two sets of delegates have been elected, and he desired to settle that affair with all harmony. He under. | stood that in former times, in the Conventions of 1850 and 1860, the regularity of the respective organizations was settled on. He did not propose to interfere with anything that had been settled by those Conventions, or to settle anew any question of regularity, “His purpose was to keop out of this Convention any matter of dispute, ‘any question calculated to disturb its harmony, He therefore offered the following: — Reeolved, That without intending to impair the decisions of previous conventions, which have determined te or- ganization at Tammany Hall to be the regular organiza- tion of the democratic party in the city of New York, this Convention, in the prosent great public exigency, and the peculiar nature and objects of ‘this body, ie expedient to admit to eeats all the delegates and alter- nates from the city of New York and other districts and es of the State Deax, of New York, moved to strike out the firet part of the resolution, It was of no con- sequence to this Convention what former conventions bod done. he came here to represent no party organiza- tion. Tle wanted in thie Convention to keep out every (Applauee.)