All efforts of the friends of Freedom in Congress encountered
opposition at every stage. Attempts by John Quincy Adams to present
petitions were thwarted in every way that vindictive rage could prompt.
Propositions for the repeal of obnoxious laws sustaining Slavery
were stifled. To accomplish this result, parliamentary courtesy and
parliamentary law were both set at defiance. On a former occasion,[132]
when Mr. Sumner brought forward his motion for the repeal of the
Fugitive Slave Act, he was refused a hearing, and obtained it only by
taking advantage of the Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation Bill, and
moving an amendment to it, which no parliamentary subtlety or audacity
could declare to be out of order. On the presentation of petitions
against the Fugitive Slave Act, from time to time, he was met by
similar checks. Meanwhile anything for Slavery was always in order. An
experience of a single day will show something of this.
* * * * *
On the 31st of July, 1854, Mr. Seward, of New York, under instructions
from the Committee on Pensions, reported a bill, which had already
passed the House of Representatives, for the relief of Betsey Nash, a
poor and aged woman, whose husband had died of wounds received in the
war of 1812, and asked for its immediate consideration. This simple
measure, demanded by obvious justice, was at once embarrassed by an
incongruous proposition for the support of Slavery. Mr. Adams, of
Mississippi, moved, as an amendment, another bill, for the relief of
Mrs. Batchelder, widow of a person killed in Boston, while aiding as
a volunteer in the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act. In the face
of various objections this amendment was adopted. Mr. Sumner at once
followed by a proposition in the following words:--
"_Provided_, That the Act of Congress, approved September 18, 1850, for
the surrender of fugitives from service or labor, be, and the same is
hereby, repealed."
This was ruled out of order, as "not germane to the bill under
consideration"; and the two bills, hitched together,--one for a
military pension, and the other for contribution to the widow of a
Slave-Hunter,--were put on their passage. Mr. Sumner then sprang for
the floor, when a struggle ensued, which is minutely reported in the
_Congressional Globe_. The careful reader will observe, that in order
to cut off an effort to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act, at least two
unquestionable rules of parliamentary law were overturned.
[132] See _ante_, p. 80.
MR. SUMNER. In pursuance of notice, I now ask leave to
introduce a bill.
MR. STUART (of Michigan). I object to it, and move to take up
the River and Harbor Bill.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (MR. COOPER, of Pennsylvania).
The other bill is not disposed of. The third reading of a Bill for the
relief of Betsey Nash.
The bill was then read a third time and passed.
MR. SUMNER. In pursuance of notice, I ask leave to introduce a
bill, which I now send to the table.
MR. STUART. Is that in order?
MR. SUMNER. Why not?
MR. BENJAMIN (of Louisiana). There is a pending motion of the
Senator from Michigan to take up the River and Harbor Bill.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. That motion was not entertained,
because the Senator from Massachusetts had and has the floor.
MR. STUART. I make the motion now.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair thinks it is in order to give
the notice.
MR. SUMNER. Notice has been given, and I now, in pursuance of
notice, introduce the bill. The question is on its first reading.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The first reading of a bill.
MR. NORRIS (of New Hampshire). I rise to a question of order.
MR. SUMNER. I believe I have the floor.
MR. NORRIS. But I rise to a question of order. I submit that
that is not the question. The Senator from Massachusetts has given
notice that he would ask leave to introduce a bill. He now asks that
leave. If there be objection, the question must be decided by the
Senate whether he shall have leave or not. Objection is made, and the
bill cannot be read.
MR. SUMNER. Very well; the first question, then, is on
granting leave, and the title of the bill will be read.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (to the Secretary). Read the title.
The Secretary read it as follows: "A Bill to repeal the Act of Congress
approved September 18, 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from
service or labor."
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on granting leave to
introduce the bill.
MR. SUMNER. And I have the floor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is
entitled to the floor.
MR. SUMNER. I shall not occupy much time, nor shall I debate
the bill. Some time ago, Mr. President, after the presentation of the
Memorial from Boston, signed by twenty-nine hundred citizens without
distinction of party, I gave notice that I should, at a day thereafter,
ask leave to introduce a bill for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act.
Desirous, however, not to proceed prematurely, I awaited the action of
the Committee on the Judiciary, to which the Memorial, and others of
a similar character, were referred. At length an adverse report was
made, and accepted by the Senate. From the time of that report down
to this moment, I have sought an opportunity to introduce this bill.
Now, at last, I have it. At a former session, Sir, in introducing a
similar proposition, I considered it at length, in an argument which I
fearlessly assert----
MR. GWIN (of California). I rise to a point of order. Has the
Senator a right to debate the question, or say anything on it, until
leave be granted?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. My impression is that the question is
not debatable.[133]
MR. SUMNER. I propose simply to explain my bill,--to make a
statement, not an argument.
MR. GWIN. I make the point of order.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I am not aware precisely what the rule
of order on the subject is; but I have the impression that the Senator
cannot debate----