Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1848-08-18

Gucstion of Slayery.wa first brought into Con-
eress In 1895, and at that time It was considered
q calamity. lie reviewed his own course ia the
Senate OF the United Stntes; and spoke Of the
III effects of receiving petitions in the lower
House of Congress. II this important question
of Slavery is not soon amicably settled, II will
result either in the dissolution of the Union or
the overthrow Of American Institutions, or per-
haps result in both these great calamities. That
the South would resist the encroachments OF the
North, there could be no doubt, and he wished
the North to think Of these things.
The signs Of the times were gloomy, and ho
forcboded the end. He alluded TO the Clayton
Compromise Bill, and after commenting upon
its merits, said il was not for him to speak Of its
fate in the House Of Representatives. He spoke
in high terms Of the gentlemen who had formed
the Clayton Bill, and he denied that it was a
compromise bill. There was no hope Of rcviv-
ing the old bill, which he deeply regretted and
in this coRaexion he examined the features of
the defeated bill, and asserted that the North
were determined not to let the vexcd question
be settled by the Constitution. The arguments
maintained by the South, he stated, had not been
met in a single instance, but they had been
evadcd by every possible means. He took the
ground that the South had equal rights with the
North, to remove into new territory with her
personal property. lie called upon Senators to
consider; they bad now come to the end OF this
matter, and. he asserted that he would never vote
for a compromise line, unless the North should
first take the lead. lie was devoted TO the I'm
ion-hc appealed to his public life Of 81 years.
His attachment to the Union was founded upon
its merits; but he must say that his love OF iber-
ty and justice was greater than his love Of the.
country. lie maintained that he was not a sec
tional man, but always endeayorcd to act for the
whole Union.
He pictured the dissolution of the Union rs a
most sad calamity, and again would he call upon
Senators TO take heed. lie believed calnmities
resulting from dissolution would fall more heavi-
" upon the North than the South, and the only
thing which troubled the South, was the question
OF Slavery. lie alluded to the Buffalo Conven-
ton and the Free Soil party. What was the
meaning of this Free Soil epithet? 1t meant
that no man should have more land than he
could cultivate. From this point Mr Calhoun
proceeded to discuss the peculiar institution Of
the South.
Mr. Mangum said he should vote for the
amendment, but against the bill in favor OF the
former, because it was a modification of the bill,
and against the latter, because it was not what
the South had a right to expect.
Mr. Niles replied 70 Messrs Calhoun and But
Ter, and expressed himself in favor Of the Bill,
but against the proposeA amendment. He took
the ground that the South cherished a settled
purpose to extend the institution Of Slavery, and
added that the North was determined 10 put a
stop TO this extension. In the course of his re-
marks MIR Niles took occasion to defend Mr.
Van Buren, from all the charges which have been
preferred against hkn5 and he maintained that
the Ex-president had a right TO do what he
thought proper in regard 10 the question Of Free
Soil. lie said that this question of Slavery
must be settled, but he could not tell how il
shouh or could te settled.
Mr. Webster begged TO inquire of Mr. Niles
whether certain Northern Democrats had not
voted for the annexation of Texas, and whether
he himself had not done so. Mr. Niles replied
that such was the case. Mr. Webster ihenques.
toned Mr. Niles as to the propriety Of his so do
ing, and he proclaimed himself as opposed to the
Southern institution, and MIR Niles made no re-
ply.
Mr. Mctcalf spoke in favor Of the amendment
Of the Bill. He said he was a momber Of Con-
gress when the Missouri Compromise was before
that body he voted for that line then, and he
was ready to vote for the same now. He spoke
of the conduct of Kentucky in regard to Slave
ry, and asserted that she sided with the South in
every particular, and would stand up, to the last,
for what she deemed due to her. Mr. Metcali
alluded 10 the pranks that were being played
throughout the land. The young men Of the
North, he said, were constantly coming to the
South and taking off the daughters, sisters, and
children of their brethren, and they did not OBJ
ject to an occasional Cu6y. Now, he said, the
South were determined TO retaliate, and so long
as this retaliation was successful, he was not
afraid Of disunion then ten thousand bands Of
mstrimony would keep the Union together, and
he therefore thought it wrong to talk of disunion.
Mr. johnson, Of Maryland, next followed, and
took the Southern view of the question. He
maintained that If the North were determined to
exclude slavery from the new territories, the re-
suit would eventually be disunion. lie consid-
cred the matter in a judicial point of view, and
gave his views at considerable length. He was
no advocate of Slavery, and he thought the
day was rapidly approaching when it would
become extinct, and be maintained that by suf
fering the institution to 60 into the new terrific
ries, this c~onsummation would be greatly hasten
ed. He commented upon the possibility of dis-
solution at some length, and exhibited the con-
sequences that would inevitably follow such n
c~onsummation. He was satisfied that the North
never would agree to vote for a Compromise,
and it was on this account he voted for the late
Clayton Compromise.
On taking his seat, Mr. Webster rose to reply
to him and Mr. Calhoun. He wished to inform
the Senate that he spoke for himself, and knew
not what were the opinions Of the North. After
abiding to the gloomy pictures presented by MIR
Calhoun, he went on to state that he was one OF
the earliest who had opposed the acquisition OF
territory. He had taken this ground more than
ten years ago, as all his speeches and votes
would testify. 1t had always been his purpose
to follow the maxim of Lord Bacon, which was,
that the best way TO prevent or remove political
calamities, was to take away or avoid occasion
for their existence.
People of tho present day were even wiser
than Lord Bacon, and they, therefore, acted up
on quite a different principle. A personal ex-
PLANTATION then occurred between MIR Calhoun
and Mr. Webster, respecting the annexation Of
Texas, when the latter proceeded 10 comment
upon the constitutional question which had been
recently discussed. To him this question was
perfectly plain, and he maintained that the con-
~stitution contained not one word or phrase which
could be applied TO this slavery question it had
nothing to do with the acquisition of territory,
for all this territory was acquired by the result
ing power of war. He also stated that it had
never been decided that we could acquire terri
tory by the sanction Of the Constitution.
This he considered a great question, and one
that he could not discnss at le present time
He believed that the people Of the country
would be glad to get rid Of all the newly ac-
quired territory but with regard to the power
of Congress in this matter, he considered it un-
limited. 1t had the power to treat all new ter
ritory ae II UnnL1 any othar spoile If uar. He