COMMERCE WITH THE SOUTH.
Mr. NEWMAN submitted the following:
Resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to inquire into the propriety of enacting a law to prohibit the sale of produce or other articles of trade to such States, or the citizens of such States, as will not respond to the President's call for men to maintain the authority of the General Government, and report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. NEWMAN. I think there is matter of importance involved in this resolution. I do not page: 32[View Page 32] myself know whether it would be practicable or constitutional to make a law of that character; but if it can be done in my judgment it is certainly expedient and right that such a law should be enacted. That resolution is only a resolution of inquiry; and I think it one that our people are deeply interested in. For if there are those in this State disposed to go on and furnish articles of produce and trade to States that are inimical or whose position make them inimical to the Federal Government, I think it is time we should take notice of it. Every means should be resorted to in the power of the State to cut off and forbid everything, that will furnish aid and comfort to our enemies. And I can not but regard every State that refuses to supply men, and every man that will adhere to such State, as an enemy of the General Government; and I therefore think it behooves us to cut oil their supplies from our State. The State pretending ,to a neutral position, it seems to me, is in a worsea more dangerously hostile position - than those openly against us. They may screen their conduct under a plea that they are still in the Union. I take it, sir, that Kentucky, or any other State, taking a neutral position in the present issue, should be regarded as more dangerous enemies of the Government, than those who come out as entirely opposed to us. Hence I do not know of but one way of getting at this matter. I have no mature plan of my own. Therefore I have thought it prudent to refer the matter to those men of talents and information and influence in the Suite composing the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr DOBBINS. If we wished to bankrupt our producing and trading people, we might pass that resolution. But has the State of Indiana the power to break down the commerce between friendly and loyal citizens? If we wished to make war, we should adopt the resolution. He told the House that a large majority of the people of Kentucky were now, and ever would be, loyal to the American flag, if they were not driven away from us by unreasonable distrusts, and proceedings to make them our enemies by legislative attempts to cut off intercourse and suppress the spontaneous and mutually advantageous acts of good neighborhood. The doctrine of secession was an unreasonable pretence, and could never be recognized as a political right.
Mr. NEBEKER also held that the doctrine of secession was a deception, and that in fact no State was yet out of the Union. But the resolution was unnecessary. These articles were contraband of war, and Kentucky did not want them. There should be nothing done in this way now, even if we had constitutional authority to pass such a law.
Mr. HOWARD was in the city of Louisville yesterday, and understood that the Mayor had made his request of the railroad not to permit shipments of provisions South. Also that the city authorities hud made an agreement not to suffer provisions to be shipped for the Southern army. He trusted that Louisville was as loyal as Cincinnati, or Madison, or Jeffersonville, or New Albany, and that a majority of the people of the State of Kentucky were decided Union men. He earnestly deprecated the resolution, and any legislation that might rouse feelings of distrust, awaken local jealousies, or seem to recognize any lack of national fellowship.
Mr. Speaker ALLEN (Mr. McLean in the Chair) suggested that as the House was thin, it would be well to postpone the further consideration of the resolution till two o'clock.
The subject was postponed accordingly.
