The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-01-30
CONGRESSIONAL.
SPEECH OF MIR. RHETT,

IL
The House being in Committee of the Whole on the
,e OF the Union on the Oregon Territory bill, ex-
cnling slavery from that Territory
mr. RlETf rose and SAID
Mr. SPEAKER: agree in opinion with those who have
nressed regret al the Introduction of the subject of
slavery al the present session into the discussions OF
ongress 1t was introduced here at the last session,
most unwarantably, think, from Pennsylvania, on the
nmnoslion TO appropriate two millions of money TO fac
ra,e peace with Mexico On the same proposition, it
has been again introduced at the present session from
New York and the bill before you It stands out, in
strong relief, in the clause prohibiting slavery IN the
Oeson Territory, after vote refusing to recognise the
Missouri compromise. Under such circumstances Il APP
raars TO me impossible 10 avoid the agitation OF this
Question: The south is compelled to defend herself, or
Stand mute and inactive under aggression and insult The
ssen state Of things is not the growth u yesterday
When came here ten years ago, found the question OF
slavery in Congress and if the policy then proposed had
been pursued, think 1t would have been suppressed,
and suppressed eiiectually. member from Vermont,
since made governor of that State, account of the
hostility he displayed TO the institutions of the south,
thought proper to enter upon the discussion of slavery in
the States proposed TO the southern gentlemen that we
should leave this hall They did so; and had they fol-
lowed up that decisive step, with other corresponding
measures protect themselves and their people from
suit and aggression, upon this floor the subject OF
slavery would have had peace and the Union greater
strength There occasions, with States with ndl
yuas when courage only there safety, and bold
ness is true wisdom We altered, and from that day to
this have witnessed antslavery agitatlons at every
Congress- which has since assembled. The very men
who told us that the rule the of these ag
taiions have themselves commenced it, although
that rule is repealed and involved in war, and the
territory not vet obtained from which they propose in
the south to exclude slavery Democrats not wings
are the assaans whilst both parties from the free States
oin in our exclusion and denuncatlon. Sir, do not
think we avoid this question; and if we are to meet
the sooner the Deuertne Decr Tor Inc sout, the Del
The question made by the bill is, has Congress the
power OF excluding the people OF the southern States
from entering and coonizing with their slaves the
territories of the United States' The gentleman from
indiana mr. PETIT and others, affirm that il has, be-
cause the sovereignty the Territories is in the gov
eminent of the United States. That is their position,
and the only position which justify their conclusion
for my Judgment there cannot be higher act OF
eregnty than determining the persons who shall cOnsli-
mte members OF the body rote OF be excluded from the
that sovereignty territories is in either Congress
the government Of the United States yield the con-
clusonthe right in Congress to exclude slavery from
their limits The discretion in Congress rules the ques-
ton majority governs the minority; and, Tor one,
will bow in acquiescence. But deny the principles
deny that sovereignty is in either Congress this gov
eminent TO show where the sovereignty in our sys
Of government must carry up to ITS first principles
and there propose to lead the argument.
Before, however, enter upon the merits OF the grave
questions involved in the discussion it is of the utmost
importance that we should understand the terms we
Hall of the sDphisres in argument consist IN the abuse
of words 1t is about sovereignty we are to reason
Of The term is well understood by publcsts and by those
OF England, from whence we have chiefly deryed our
ideas OF the principles OF free government II is defined to
be the supreme ultimate authority in State" This
authority must exist somewhere, or else there can
be no government; and it is chiefly in making OF
unmaklng the fundamental law, or constitution q
State, that its supreme attributes are displayed
Its powers indeed exercised in all the actions OF the
government since all, the very least, directly indi
recty, emanate from its authority But the powers Of
sovereignty thing and its being another The
faculty of Speech and the OF limbs, powers
of man, but they not the And il is, with
sovereignty in State, which exists only in the forms
Of action, but in being the source, the principle of all
action, the supreme ultimate authority by which all
forms of action in government exist In despotisms SOW
eregnty exists in the will of a single Individual which
for the time being, is the fundamental law. In mixed
governments like that of:England all her publicsts agree
that the sovereignty in the King, Lords, and Commons
in Parliament IN republican governments, like ours
shall maintain that il in the people Of the States
Now, let US examine first, before we ascend to general
principles, the clause OF the constitution, which the
gentleman from Indiana relies, to show that sovereignty
the territories is in the government Of the United
States. 1.-The Congress shall have power to dispose Of
and make all neediu rules and regulations respecting the
territory other property belonging to the United States
Here, the first place. nothing is said about the govern
meat OF fe United States Whatever power is conceded
BY the clause is conceded TO 'Me Congress" What
Congessi The first clause in the constitution answers
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in
Congress of the United States, which shall con-
SYST OF Senate and House of Representatives The
Senate and House of Representatives, very fan
short OF being the government of the United States
But let us stride this difficulty although rather
awkward for strict consructlonls Suppose Congress
10 be the government, what power does the clause con-
veyi "To dispose OF, and make all needfl rules and
regulations concerning, the territory other property
belonging to the United States" Does the power "to
dispose OF and make all neelful rules and regula
TONS" imply sovereignty Mark, sir, how far shor
tins phraseogy in its scope of that other clause in the
constitution which relates to the other property OF the
United Staes-the forts, arsenas, magazines, and dock
yards Over these, and over this District Congress SIS
10 exercise cIctsire legislation oil whatsoever
Does not the clause relate TO the territory only prop
ey and confer only powers necessary Tor It's disposition
and control property II speaks OF the territories in
connection with the other property OF the United States
Congress can sell the lands lying within the territory
and to purchasers and settlers in their persons
and property they make call needp rules and reg
natons, establish territorial governments and pass
laws. This, 1t appears TO me, all the authority the
clause coniers and this authority is vested not in the
government but IN Congress Suppose the owners OF
factory should convey to an agent the power contained
IN inns clause, o dispose OF and make all needu rules
and regulations concerning IT," would il make him the
proprietor On the contrary, would not directly the
rary inference ARISE IRON his accepting such trust
Yet this e the language by which sovereignty is claimed
70 pc IN me government Of the United States, authorizing
ue expulsion oil onehaf of 1.-The States out OF ter
rories But the clause itself directly repudiaes the
uea that either Congress the government have any
property, much less sovereignty territories
s words are, territory and other property belonging 10
me Ontted States Here is direct affirmation, that
territory does not "bong either to Congress the gov
eminent Now, although il does not follow that where
ee is property or property may belong to individuals
hee is soyeregnty yetwhere there Is no property Over
an unsettled country, there cannot be sovereignty The
supreme ultimate authority cannot exist where there is
neither the inferior right of property, which exists in in
gWlduals, or the higher right By the eminent domain
Inc clause however, does not stop at negatving, by i'm
Nicahon, the idea that the government has the sove-
egnty over our territories, but it directly asserts where
we property and the sovereignty over them ae"beLong
ng to the United States" Here is the great truth which
dlsslpates all mists and iaacies.
a To FRAN ntq