Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

the person who prepared it, or to the body who adopted it. Those who assume that this phrase, so limited, confers a power so unlimited, are bound to explain why similar language was not used to grant similar power, in other parts of the same instrument. No man has done this-no man has attempted to do it; and it is an obstacle, in limine, which, till removed, is insuperable. He then enumerates a dozen other provisions of the Constitution, under which different persons have sought to justify the exercise of this power. Among these are the war and treaty-making powers; the right to admit new States; the right to sell the public lands; the right of ownership; the right or duty of settlement; the right of Sovereignty; the nature of government; nationality; the principles of agency and trust, &c.

but from the necessity of circumstances. The power to interfere, in any manner, is not one the constitution, but only by moral reasons that can be justified by the plain provisions of to the happiness and well-being of the people that render some form of government essential who are living without law or order. If Congress ventures to take even this step, it does the people to obtain indemnification for thus it at its own peril, and must throw itself upon exceeding its legitimate authority.

ency of passing the Wilmot Proviso. There He then proceeded to examine the expediUnion which see in this measure a direct atare at least, said he, fourteen States in the tack upon their rights, and disregard of their feelings and interests. No man can shut his eyes to the excitement which prevails there,Much of the confusion, he said, which ac- assemblies, and in every way that can express manifested in legislative proceedings, popular companies this subject, has arisen from the public opinion-or be insensible to the evil day use we now make of the word "territory" by that is upon us. applying it to those political communities would survive all the dangers with which it He believed that the Union which are organized under the name of Terri- might be menaced, and that it is not destined torial Governments, and considering it as so applied in the Constitution. He argued that the great mission confided to it, that of exto perish until long after it shall have fulfilled the term originally designated the public do- ample and encouragement to the nations of main, or land, and had merely a geographical the earth who are struggling with the despotmeaning, and not a political one; and he refers to Acts of Congress of 1785 and 1787, in darkness once impenetrable, but where the ism of centuries, and groping their way in a which it was repeatedly so considered and light of knowledge and freedom is beginning used. In the ordinance providing for the Gov- to disperse the gloom. Sad will be the day ernment of the Western territory, it was in when the first drop of blood is shed in the premany places denominated a "district." Had servation of this Union. That day need never, those local communities, which we now call come, and never will come, if the same spirit territories, preserved the term district, as de- of compromise and concession by each to the scriptive of their political organization, we feelings of all, which animated our fathers, should probably never have heard of the extended construction now given to this power continues to animate us and our children. As of making needful rules for territory or land, adoption of this Proviso worth the hazard at a mere practical question, is the legislative and other property. The use of the term territory was unknown in its present sense, at the be great advantages, inestimable indeed, to be which alone it can be secured? There should time of the adoption of the constitution. He gained, before such a measure is forced upon maintained that territory, as it is employed in the country. No good, under the most favorthe constitution, means property, and that the able circumstances, could result from this Conclause already quoted, gives no right of legis-gressional interference with the rights of the lation for the inhabitants. He arrayed many eminent authorities who have taken the opposite ground, and endeavored to show the fallacy of their reasonings.

He combated every right to legislate for the territories supposed to be supported by constitutional authority, in an argument of great length-evincing much research and ingenuity. constitutional part of the speech may be sumThe whole med up in the statement, that the constitution confers on Congress no power of any kind to give laws to the people inhabiting a territory; that it does not even confer the right to organize a government or do any other act of sovereignty; and, that if Congress may exercise such a right at any time or under any circumstances, it is not derived from the organic laws,

people of the Territories.

there if left without this prohibition? There Can slavery go are very few persons anywhere who think it question. The contest is not worth the cost. can. Considerations of profit would control the The Proviso is urged on the ground of its expediency. It is opposed upon the ground of its unconstitutionality. Those who urge it that the measure is dangerous in itself, or promay well abandon it when circumstances show fitless in its result. Mr. CASS concluded by saying, that he was precluded from voting in conformity with his opinions. He had been instructed by the Legislature of Michigan to vote in favor of the measure, and he was a believer in the doctrine of instructions, when fairly exercised and under proper circumstan

ces.

When the time comes that he should be required to vote upon the question, as a practical one, in a bill providing for a Territorial Government, he should know how to reconcile his duty to the Legislature and duty to himself, by surrendering a trust that he could no longer fulfil.

On the 29th of January, Mr. CLAY presented himself before the Senate in the same character in which he appeared thirty years ago -the pacificator between the slave and the free States-and introduced the following Resolutions, accompanying each one with proper explanatory remarks:

1st. Resolved, That California, with suitable boundaries, ought upon her application to be ad mitted as one of the States of this Union, without the imposition by Congress of any restriction in respect to the exclusion or introduction of slavery within those boundaries.

2d. Resolved, That as slavery does not exist by law, and is not likely to be introduced into any of the territory acquired by the United States from the Republic of Mexico, it is inexpedient for Congress to provide by law either for its introduction into or exclusion from any part of the said territory; and that appropriate Territorial Governments ought to be established by Congress in all of the said territory, not assigned as the boundaries of the proposed State of California, without the adoption of any restriction or condition on the subject of slavery.

3d. Resolved, That the western boundary of the State of Texas ought to be fixed on the Rio del Norte, commencing one marine league from its mouth, and running up that river to the southern line of New Mexico; thence with that line eastwardly, and so continuing in the same direction to the line as established between the United States and Spain, excluding any portion of New Mexico, whether lying on the east or west of that

river.

4th. Resolved, That it be proposed to the State of Texas that the United States will provide for the payment of all that portion of the legitimate and bona fide public debt of that State contracted prior to its annexation to the United States, and for which the duties on foreign imports were pledged by the said State to its creditors, not exceeding the sum of $- in consideration of the said duties so pledged having been no longer applicable to that object after the said annexation, but having thenceforward become payable to the United States; and upon the condition also that the said State of Texas shall, by some solemn and authentic act of her Legislature, or of a convention, relinguish to the United States any claim which it has to any part of New Mexico.

5th. Resolved, That it is inexpedient to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, whilst that institution continues to exist in the State of Maryland, without the consent of that State, without the consent of the people of the District, and without just compensation to the owners of slaves within the District.

6th. But resolved, That it is expedient to pro

hibit within the District the slave-trade, in slaves brought into it from States or places beyond the limits of the District, either to be sold therein as merchandise, or to be transported to other markets without the District of Columbia.

7th. Resolved, That more effectual provision ought to be made by law, according to the requirement of the constitution, for the restitution and delivery of persons bound to service or labor in any State, who may escape into any other State or Territory in the Union.

And 8th. Resolved, That Congress has no power to prohibit or obstruct the trade in slaves between the slave-holding-States, but that the admission or exclusion of slaves brought from one into another of them, depends exclusively upon their own particular laws.

Although Mr. C. desired, on submitting these Resolutions, to avoid bringing on a general debate, and proposed that they should be made the order of the day, some days ahead, when he intended to enter into a more elaborate argument than he designed on that occasion, there was, nevertheless, a pretty sharp onset made upon them by several members from the South, and some undue warmth of language was indulged in.

Mr. FOOTE and Mr. DAVIS, the two Senators from Mississippi, were particularly vehement in their onset, and most eager to engage in the conflict. Mr. MASON, Mr. RUSK, MR. KING, MR. DOWNS, MR. BERRIEN, and Mr. BUTLER, all from the slave States, thought it necessary, lest their silence might be construed into an assent, to interpose their objections without any delay. Passing by the first speech, we shall offer a sketch of the second, -the more elaborate one,-that was delivered on the 5th of February, when the Resolutions came up in order.

Mr. CLAY began by saying that never, on any former occasion, had he risen under feelings of such painful solicitude. He had witnessed many periods of great anxiety, of peril, and of danger in this country, but never before had he risen to address any assemblage so oppressed, so appalled, and so anxious. He had, again and again in his chamber, implored Him, who holds the destinies of nations, as of individuals, in his hands, to bestow upon our country his blessing, to calm the violence and rage of party, to still passion, and to allow reason once more to resume its empire; and he hoped it would not be out of place to make the same supplication there. He attributed all the present dangers and difficulties to party-spirit, that was busy in the North, the South, in Congress, and in State Legislatures. The House of Representatives had felt its influence so strongly, that it had spent a whole week this very session, in the vain endeavor to elect a door-keeper, and the only question was, whether he entertained

opinions upon certain great national measures, coincident with this or that side of the House. Nearly eight years since he had taken his final leave, as he had supposed, of the Senate. He had not conceived the possibility of his ever returning to it, and if his private wishes and inclinations, his desire, during the short remnant of his days, to remain in repose and quiet, could have prevailed, he would not be seen occupying the seat which he now occupies on that floor. But the Legislature of the State to which he belonged, unsolicited, had re-elected him and he had come there in obedience to a sense of stern duty, with no personal objects, no private views, now or hereafter, to gratify. He begged to assure all who might hear him, or any persons out of the Capitol, who hope in the race for honors and elevation, for higher honors and higher elevation, that he, at least, would never interfere with them in their pursuits; and if his wishes could prevail, his name should never be used in competition. When his service was terminated in that body, his mission, so far as respects the public affairs of this world, and upon this earth, would be closed, he hoped, forever. It is impossible not to perceive that party-spirit affects all our affairs. At the moment when the White House is itself in danger from conflagration, instead of all hands uniting to extinguish the flames, we are contending about who shall be its next occupant. It is passion-passion, party, party, and intemperance, that he dreaded in the adjustment of the questions, which unhappily divide our distracted country. At this moment, besides the legislative bodies of the Capitol, there are twenty-odd furnaces in full blast, emitting heat, and passion, and intemperance. Two months ago all was calm, in comparison with the present. Now, all is uproar, confusion, and menace to the existence of the Union, and to the happiness of this people. He conjured senators, by all their hopes now and hereafter, to repress the ardor of these passions, to listen to the voice of reason. He had cut himself off, he said, from all the usual enjoyments of society during this whole session, and had confined himself, almost entirely, to his own chamber, anxiously meditating on some plan of accommodation, which would restore the blessings of concord, harmony, and peace to this great coun⚫try.

The first Resolution relates to California. There is no concession by either party. If slavery is interdicted within the limits of California, it is done by California herself, and not by Congress; and has it not been the doctrine of all parties, that when a State is about to be admitted into the Union, it has a right to decide for itself, whether it will or not tolerate slavery within its boundaries. He then referred to the introduction of Missouri

into the Union. The great argument used by those contending for its admission was, that she had all the rights of any pre-existing State, and was legally as competent to decide whether she should have slavery or not as New York, or any other of the old thirteen were. No one doubts now that those Northwestern States to which the ordinance of 1787 applied, have just as much right to introduce slavery within their borders, as Virginia has to maintain the existence of it within hers. If, then, in the struggle for empire between the two classes of States, a decision in California has taken place, adverse to the wishes of the South, it is a decision respecting which they can utter no complaint towards the General Government, for it is made by California, who unquestionably had the constitutional right to make it.

Respecting the second resolution, he said he knew that every one of the free States in this Union, without exception, had by its legislative body, passed resolutions instructing their Senators and requesting their Representatives to have the restriction of the Wilmot Proviso incorporated in any Territorial Government which might be established under the auspices of Congress. He knew how much they had set their hearts upon the adoption of this measure. In the second resolution he asked them, for the sake of peace, and in the spirit of mutual forbearance to the other members of the Union, to give it up. As a compensation for doing so, he felt bound to offer something in return, though it was not by any means an equivalent. What he offered was what he considered two indisputable truths; the first is, that slavery no longer exists, by law, in any part of the acquisitions made by us from Mexico; and the second is, that according to all the probabilities of the case, slavery never will be introduced into any portion of the territories so acquired from Mexico. It is said that these two are tantamount to the Wilmot Proviso. But he did not think so, as the one was a positive enactment prohibiting it, while the other was the simple expression of an opinion. He then adverted to the condition of the territory while it was still Mexican. At that time, slavery had been formally abolished, whether regularly done or not was no question for this Government to settle. The last act of Mexico, when arranging for a surrender of jurisdiction, showed the abhorrence with which she would regard the introduction of slavery into any portion of the territory that she should cede away. This was sufficient, he thought, to prove that slavery does not exist there by law, unless slavery was carried there the moment the treaty was ratified by the two par ties, under the operation of the Constitution of the United States. This idea he declared was irreconcilable with any comprehension of rea

son that he might possess. How can it be argued that the fifteen slave States, by the operation of the Constitution, carried into the ceded territory their institution of slavery, any more than it can be argued, on the other side, that by the operation of the same Constitution, the fifteen free States carried into the ceded territory their principles of freedom. Suppose, said he, that we had obtained the new territory with slavery existing in it, in fact and in law, would gentlemen from the slave States patiently listen to any argument which undertook to show that, notwithstanding this fact, the Constitution of the United States abolished it the moment it took effect over that country? The argument was just as good for one side as the other. Amid the conflict of interests, principles, and legislation, which prevails in the two parts of the Union, can you come to any other conclusion than that which I understand to be the conclusion of the public law of the world, of reason, and justice, that the status of law, as it existed at the moment of the conquest or the acquisition, remains until it is altered by the sovereign authority of the conquering or acquiring power? This is the established public law of the world. The laws of Mexico, as they prevailed at the time of the cession, remained the same until and unless they were altered by that power which had newly obtained sovereign rights over it.

Mr. CLAY then noticed the general power which appertains to the Government on the subject of slavery. Congress has no power, under the Constitution, to touch slavery within the States, except in the three specified particulars in that instrument, viz: to adjust the subject of representation, to impose taxes when a system of direct taxation is made, and to perform the duty of surrendering fugitive slaves that may escape from service which they owe in slave States, and take refuge in free States. If, said he, Congress were to attack, within the States, the institution of slavery for the purpose of its extinction, then would his voice be for war, for then would there be a case which would justify, in the sight of God, and in the presence of the nations of the earth, resistance to such an unconstitutional and usurped attempt. Then should the slave States be acting in defence of their rights, property, safety, lives; and then, if unfortunately civil war should break out, and there should be presented to the nations of the earth the spectacle of one portion of this Union endeavoring to subvert an institution in violation of the Constitution and the most sacred obligations that can bind men, the slave States would have the sympathies of all men who love justice and truth. Far different would be our case if the same fearful condition should arise from an attempt to carry slavery into the new territories acquired from Mexico.

[ocr errors]

We have all read of the efforts made by France to propagate on the continent of Europe not slavery but the rights of man. If a civil war should break out in this country in the strife to establish slavery on the one hand, and to prevent it on the other, in the territories where it does not exist, what a scene would be exhibited to the contemplation of mankind? It would be a war in which we, of the slave States should have no sympathy, no good wishes, and in which all the world would be against us, for, from the commencement of the revolution down to the present time, we have constantly reproached our British ancestors for introducing slavery into this country; and it is one of the best defences which can be made for the institution that it was forced on this country against the wishes of the inhabitants.

He declared his belief that Congress has power over slavery in the territories, and referred to the argument of Mr. CASS in opposition to this view. When a point is settled, said he, by all the elementary writers of our country, by all the departments of our Government, legislative, executive, and judicial, when it has been so settled for a period of fifty years, and never was seriously disturbed till recently, then if we are to regard anything as fixed and settled, should this question be, which has been always decided in a particular way. The power of Congress over this subject he derived both from the right to regulate the territories and other property of the United States, and the right to make treaties. When our Constitution was written, the whole country northwest of the Ohio river was unpeopled. Is it possible that Congress had no right whatever, after it had become national property, to declare what description of settlers should occupy the public lands? If they had supposed that the introduction of slavery would enhance their value, would they not have had the right to say, in regulating the territory, that any one who chooses, may bring slaves to clear and cultivate the soil, &c.? Or, suppose that Congress might think that a greater amount of revenue would be derived from the waste lands beyond the Ohio river by the interdiction of slavery, would they not have a right to interdict it? The exercise of the power to make Governments for territories is temporary, and it ceases whenever there is a sufficient popula tion for self-government. Sixty thousand is the number fixed by the ordinance of 1787. The first settlement of Ohio was about Marietta, and contained two or three hundred people from New England. Cincinnati was the next point, and was settled by a few persons from, perhaps, New Jersey. Did those few persons, the moment they arrived there, acquire sovereign rights, and had they power to dispose of these territories? Had they even

power-a handful of men established at Marietta or Cincinnati-to govern themselves? The Constitution no doubt contemplates that, inasmuch as the power is temporary, the Government who owns the soil may, through Congress, regulate the settlement of the soil, and govern the settlers, until they acquire numbes and capacity to govern themselves.

The power of Congress to introduce or to exclude slavery in the ceded territory he finds in the acquiring, or treaty-making provision of the Constitution. Such a power exists somewhere. It existed-no one will deny it -in Mexico prior to the cession of these territories, and when Mexico made the transfer of territory to the United States, she also transferred her sovereignty. What Mexico alienated, the United States received. This Government then possesses all the power now that formerly was possessed by Mexico over the ceded country, and can do, within the limits of the Constitution, what Mexico could have done. On this subject there is no limitation which prescribes the extent to which the powers shall be exercised. Although, in the Constitution, there is no grant of power to Congress, in specific terms, over the subject of slavery, yet the same is true over a great variety of matters over which Congress may unquestionably operate. The general grant of power comprehends all the elements of which that power consists. If there be a power to acquire, there must be a power to govern. From the two sources of power to which he had referred, and especially the last, did Congress obtain the right to act in the territories in question, and he considered the right sufficient either to permit or prohibit in them the introduction of slavery.

As respects what he calls the second truth, what are the facts, said Mr. C., that have occurred within the last three months? California,-where, if any where, slavery would most probably have been introduced in the new territories-California, herself, has declared, by the unanimous vote of her Convention, against the importation of slavery within her limits, and that Convention was composed of persons from the slave-holding as well as from the free States. California has thus responded to the opinion contained in the resolution. The mountain-region of New Mexico, the nature of its soil-its unproductive character, every thing relating to itevery thing that we hear about it must necessarily lead to the conclusion that slavery is not likely to be introduced there. If these are truths, said Mr. CLAY, why hesitate to promulgate them? Senators coming from the free States, said he, when this Wilmot Proviso was disseminated through your States, and your people and yourselves became seriously attached to it, you apprehended the introduc

tion of slavery into California. You did not know much,-very few of us heard much of these territories, and owing to this want of information, the whole North blazed up in behalf of a prohibition. You left your constituents under this apprehension. When you left your residences, you did not know that a Constitution had been adopted by the people of California excluding slavery from that country. If what we all know now, had been known in the free States two years ago

if all the present excitement and danger, as well as the probability that slavery will never be conveyed to those territories had then been known, do you believe that the agitation on the Proviso would ever have reached the

height that it has attained? Do any of you believe it? And if, before leaving your homes, you had had an opportunity of conferring with your constituents upon this most leading and important fact-of the adoption of a Constitution excluding slavery in California do you not believe, Senators and Representatives coming from the free States, that if you had had the advantage of that fact told in serious, calm, fire-side conversation with your constituents, they would not have told you to come here and settle all these disturbing questions without danger to the Union?

What do you want?-what do you want? you who reside in the free States. Do you want that there shall be no Slavery introduced into the territories acquired by the war with Mexico? Have you not your desire in California? And in all human probability you will have it in New Mexico also. What more do you want? You have got what is worth more than a thousand Wilmot Provisos. You have nature itself on your side-fact itself on your side-and this truth staring you in the face, that there is no slavery in those territories. If you are not mad, if you can elevate yourselves from the struggles of party to the height of patriots in every sense, what will you do? You will see Look at the fact as it exists. that this fact was unknown to the great majority of the people; you will see that they acted upon one set of facts, while we have another set of facts before us; and we will act as patriots-as responsible men, and as lovers of liberty, and lovers, above all, of this Union. We will act upon this set of facts that were unknown to our constituents, and appeal to their justice and magnanimity to concur with us in this action for peace, concord, and harmony.

Mr. CLAY then passed to the resolutions relating to Texas. He considered this question as the most difficult with which Congress had to deal, because it was one of boundary. The North would probably be anxious to contract Texas within the narrowest possible limits, in order to diminish the theatre of slavery, while

« ZurückWeiter »