with all the odium and unpopularity attached to it; never speak of it again; what you have to do, do openly, directly and manfully, and clutch no more at the tail of the lion, but sieze him by the jaws.

But it is not with the Proviso that we are at present occupied, it is with all and every species of legislation for the prevention of slavery in the territories of the Union. It is against the policy, not against the abstract justice or constitutionality of such measures that we are arguing.

Deprecating, as we do, every measure which will tend toward the establishment of slavery on the territories, and holding such extension among the greatest evils to be combatted, we are still averse to the employment of the direct constitutional power of the government for its suppression.

We now invite the reader's attention to a brief view of the lines of policy severally indicated by President Taylor in his Message of the 21st of January, and in the subsequent resolutions offered by Mr Clay, touching upon the various topics in agitation between the South and the North.

The policy of both is pacific and conciliatory. Neither the President nor Mr. Clay concede anything to the passions of either party, but rather demand of each important concessions, both to the necessities of the times and to the higher interests of the nation as a whole.

Seriously alarmed at the prospect of a long continued contest between the North and the South for the possession of California and New Mexico, the President was not slow in urging upon the people of that territory the only course which promised peace and security to the Union. The Hon. Thomas Butler King, Bearer of Despatches to California, was instructed by the President to advise the people of that territory to make an early application for admission into the Union. He "did not hesitate to express to them his desire" that each Territory should form a plan of a State Constitution, and submit the same to Congress, with a prayer for admission as a State. Under the Constitution, every State is the founder and regulater of its own municipal laws and domestic institutions. "The subjects thus left exclusively to the States were not designed or expected," says the President, "to become topics of national agitation." "Still, as, under

the Constitution, Congress has power to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territories," "every new acquisition of Territory has led to discussions," whether slavery should not be prohibited in the new Territories. "The periods of excitement from this cause, which have heretofore occurred, have been safely passed, but during the interval, of whatever length, which may elapse before the admission of the Territories ceded by Mexico as States, it appears probable that similar excitement will prevail to an undue extent." The President thereupon earnestly recommends the admission of California, as soon as may be consistent with propriety.

The policy of the President in the treatment of the claims of Texas to the territory of New Mexico, differs not in purpose or in principle from that offered by Mr. Clay. He proposes that the territory shall be left in statu quo, defended by the general government from the invasion and inroad of its barbarous neighbors, and suffered to form itself as rapidly as possible into a State, which shall then make application for admission into the Union. After the admission of New Mexico as a

State, the boundary dispute between herself and Texas can be brought before the Supreme Court of the United States and adjusted by the principles of the laws of nations.

As it is impossible to improve upon the style of this admirable Message, or to condense its statements, nothing but want of space has prevented our quoting it entire.

"Any attempt," say the President, "to deny to the people of the State the right of self-government, in a matter which peculiarly affects themselves, will infallibly be regarded by them as an invasion of their rights; and, upon the principles laid down in our own Declaration of Independence, they will certainly be sustained by the great mass of the American people. To assert that they are a conquered people, and must, as a State, submit to the will of their conquerors, in this regard, will meet with no cordial response among American freemen. Great numbers of them are native citizens of the United States, not inferior to the rest of our countrymen in intelligence and patriotism; and no language of menace to restrain them in the exercise of

an undoubted right, substantially guarantied to them by the treaty of cession itself, shall ever be uttered by me, or encouraged and sustained by persons acting under my authority. It is to be expected that, in the residue of the territory ceded to us by Mexico, the people residing there will, at the time of their incorporation into the Union as a State, settle all questions of domestic policy to suit themselves."

It is understood, that the State of Texas has no remedy against any decision that may be made against its claim to the territory of New Mexico by the general government. The question is one over which the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction; the previous decision of Congress being necessarily a law to them.

In regard to the admission of California, Mr. Clay is explicit. He holds the same opinion and offers the same line of policy with that adopted by the President.

For our own part, we confess to have been more astonished, and to have had our confidence more deeply shaken, by Southern opposition to the admission of the new sovereignty, than by any previous action of the extreme Southern party.

It is understood that in California, out of 15,000 votes or thereabouts, some 800 or 1000, only, were opposed to a State Constitution adverse to slavery. Such a vote is equivalent to unanimity; it is the voice of an entire people; it is a voice, which, if not listened to, will perhaps make itself heard in other and more formidable accents. Are the South so jealous of State sovereignty? do they hold the voice of a sovereignty in such high respect, in such a sacred regard, and do they believe that a piece of parchment, or an entry in the records of Congress is the divine source from which it sprung? Do they believe that there is no State, no people in California, until they, the majority of one, have decided that there shall be ?

Would the revolt of any portion of an American Republic, and the establishment of an independent sovereignty, be a thing wholly new and unheard of on this continent? The road across the deserts is perilous for our troops; and how is it with them when they arrive in California? They fraternize with the people, and desert to the mines. We cannot carry on a successful war against California; we cannot drive

her into the adoption of a Constitution of our own making. We must receive herwe, the sovereignties-as an equal, and a sister sovereignty; or, if she be of our own spirit she will turn from us in contempt. What need, then, to enact laws for the suppression or the establishment of slavery in California? for that is one of the points at issue. But, perhaps, the deserts are in danger of the slave-holder; the steep defiles and arid plains of New Mexico are in danger of cotton and sugar cane. Nature has settled all that; why legislate against nature? Legislation in such a spirit, shows not merely a want of magnanimity, but a want of prudence. If a law is not intended to effect an object, but merely to express a passion, it is, indeed, a blow struck into the air; but it is a shaking of the fist at the adversarya passionate hectoring which will not fail to rouse him to some resentful action, or at least awaken contempt.

The general doctrine of the Resolutions offered by Mr. Clay is, that although the power of Congress to make laws for the territories is undeniable, it is, at the present moment, and, under existing circumstances, not only inexpedient, but unnecessary to legislate for them in regard to slavery. That institution having been already forbidden by the laws of Mexico in New Mexico and California, and by the Resolutions of Annexation in the territory lying north of 36 deg. 30 min., what need of any farther legislation upon the subject? If slavery must needs be brought upon the new territories, let the responsibility of this introduction rest upon the new sovereignties which are to be formed upon it. Mr. Clay urges, that it is proper for both sides, in this great controversy, to make concessions; we conceive the line of policy which he has pointed out for us, to be at once humane and just, and worthy of the eminent position, a position of mediation, in which Mr. Clay has been placed by the universal respect of the nation; he is held to be a person of sufficient dignity to offer resolutions of mediation and concession; the nation have permitted him to do this; have applauded and encouraged him in it; and already the spirit of toleration and forbearance begins to temper and subdue the heat of party animosity in all parts of the country where the resolutions, and the argument

which defends them, have been read by the people.

Because slavery does not exist in the territories acquired from Mexico, and is not likely to be introduced there, that is the reason why it is unnecessary, and, therefore, inexpedient for us, to legislate upon the subject.

In regard to the treatment of the claims of Texas upon the United States for the territory of New Mexico, which she calls her own, wishing to include the most populous part of that territory within her own boundaries, Mr. Clay has offered a line of policy somewhat different in principle, though identical in aim with that offered by the President. Claiming for the general government an unquestionable and undivided power of deciding the controversy and fixing the line of boundary, he advises that a certain portion of the debts of Texas shall be assumed by the general government, in compensation for the resignation, by Texas, of all pretensions on her part, to the territory in question. That then, a boundary shall be given to her, adding largely to her extent, and yet not including the populous parts of New Mexico, nor impairing the integrity of that territory, so soon to become an important member of

the Union.

The language of the resolution of Annexation is, that Congress doth consent that the territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to the Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State;" leaving the ascertainment of the boundary for a future time, as follows: "Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment of all questions of boundary, &c., &c."

Mr. Clay argues, that as Mexico and the United States, conjointly, might have fixed the boundaries of Texas, the power now lodges solely in the United States, which was jointly possessed and exercised by her with Mexico.

How is it with regard to the limits of new States? (we add of ourselves.) The people of a certain territory petition to be made a State, with certain boundaries; their petition is granted, with such boundaries as Congress, in its wisdom, may see fit to mark out upon the domain; and this is the mode in which the boundaries of new States have been defined.

Mr. Clay adds, that possibly after the

boundary has been fixed by the United States, Texas may bring the question before the Supreme Court. But that "there are questions too large for any tribunal of that kind to try, - great political questions, national, territorial questions, which exceed their limits;for such questions their powers are utterly incompetent." He will not insist that this particular question is beyond the range of the court; but he claims that the United States are now invested solely and exclusively with that power which was common to both the contracting parties, to fix, ascertain, and settle the western and northern limits of Texas. He contends for the full power of the Government, under a clear and obvious necessity, to dispose of any portion of its territory, as the public good may require, when the limits of that State are ascertained. With regard to Texas, all is open and unfixed. The territory was purchased from Mexico at the price of $15,000,000, and a costly bargain!! and Texas cannot claim, as her own, what has been purchased by the nation.

Mr. Clay proposes that as Texas had incurred a debt before her annexation, for which her revenues were pledged, the people of the United States, being in the enjoyment of those revenues, may, with propriety, pay a portion of this debt. He states, that in the resolutions of Annexation it is clearly stipulated, that, in no event, should the United States "become liable for, or charged with any portion of the debt or liabilities of Texas;" but, says Mr. Clay, there is a third party, who was no party to the annexation, that is to say, the creditor of Texas, who advanced the money on the faith of solemn pledges made by Texas to him to re-imburse the loan by the appropriation of the duties received on foreign imports.

By the letter of the law, and the terms of the resolutions of Annexation, we are not under any obligation to assume any portion of the debts of Texas. But if we should, from other considerations, see fit to do so, then there is a kind of propriety in our assuming that portion for which the revenues were pledged.

The policy of Mr. Clay differs from that of President Taylor, in the single point of the method by which the boundary between

New Mexico shall be ascertained. Both agree as to the sufficiency of the laws of Mexico, still in force there, to render any action of Congress upon her territory, in regard to slavery, unnecessary. Mr. Clay, indeed, advises the establishment of a territorial government, by which a line of boundary must, of course, be adopted. President Taylor would only protect the people of New Mexico from aggression, until they shall be strong enough to form a Sovereignty of their own, and then have the question of boundary settled by the Supreme Court.

The plan of Mr. Clay is probably the one most acceptable to Texas, and, perhaps, to the South generally, were it not for the prejudice of that portion of the Union against the exercise of power necessary to the fixation of the boundary. It is also, in all probability, the one that will be received with greatest favor in New Mexico, as it promises a speedy protection and liberation. The inhabitants of that territory have sent a petition, requesting the establishment of a more efficient government to protect them against the inroads of the Indian tribes, from which they represent they are suffering dreadfully at the present time. They are also strongly opposed to Union with Texas: considerations, which will ensure the popularity of Mr. Clay's plan of legislation. That of the President, on the other hand, avoids much argument, and leaves the question of boundary to be settled by a competent tribunal, if indeed there is any evidence upon which the Court will find it possible to found a decision.

Of equal moment in this formidable controversy is the question of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. Mr. Clay argues against it; not upon the ground of its unconstitutionality, for he contends that the power of Congress to legislate for the district is unquestionable by the very words of the Constitution itself, but because it is necessary to have regard to the intentions of the ceding States, out of whose territory the district was originally composed. All that remains of the District at present, is that which was ceded by Maryland, the portion given by Virginia having been subsequently retroceded to that State. The power to abolish slavery in the District does not indeed lodge in Maryland, and it there

fore most evidently resides in Congress itself. But it may be highly improper and inexpedient,-perhaps it may even be an act of tyranny and dishonor-to employ that power in this particular instance.

Mr. Clay urges that it never could have entered into the thoughts of the people of Maryland and Virginia, when they made the cession of their territory, that slavery would be abolished in the District before it was abolished in their States; and it would be taking an unfair advantage of them to make use of their gift in a manner contrary to their wishes. This is the argument from dishonor. It is necessary also to consult justice. If slavery is abolished in the District, the owners of the slaves must be fully compensated for their loss; and, moreover, as the wishes of the people ought, in all important cases, to be consulted, the assent of the inhabitants of the District must be obtained, if we would remove from the act the imputation of tyranny. The people of the District have no representation; and, it is, therefore, necessary to use the greatest delicacy and caution in making laws for them, and to consult their wishes in so momentous a matter. These conditions must all be fully satisfied, Mr. Clay argues, before it can be either just, honorable or expedient to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia.

In regard to the slave trade in that Dis-trict, however, Mr. Clay speaks of it in terms of the severest condemnation and abhorrence, and would have it immediately abolished, by authority of the general government.

It seems, at first view, an intolerable thing that the seat of government of a free country should be contaminated by the presence of a slave. This is the enthusiastic view of the matter: we forget, in indulging it, that the District, being chiefly inhabited by officers of the government, and representatives of the entire nation, does necessarily, in itself, represent not merely the free, but the slave States. Southern Representatives residing in the District, become citizens of the District. They, of course, bring with them their domestic servants, to whom they are personally, often tenderly, attached. It is necessary to pay a regard to their feelings, in this matter at least. The District represents the entire nation, and the domestic