Wisconsin tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1847-1854, 1848-09-08
From the New York Tribune.
SPEECH OF DANIEL WEBSTER.
on THE onEGoS BILL.

|
| THE OREGON BILL
| The question being on motion of Mr. Benton
that the Senate recede from its amendments to
which the House had refused to agree
Mr.. WEBSTER rose and said : | am very little
inclined to prolong this debate, and hope | am
utterly dIsEclIned to bring into it any new warmth
or excitement. | wish to say a few words how
ever first upon the question it lis presented to
Us as parliamentary question; and secondly, up
on The general question involved in the debate.
As question OF parliamentary proceeding /
understand the case to be this: The House of
Representatives sent bill for the establish
Ileht OF territorial government III Oregon: no
motion has been made in the Senate to strike out
any part of that bill. The bill purporting to re-
spect Oregon simply and alone, has not been the
subject ofany objection In this branch ofthe Legis
iature The Senate has proposed important
amendment to this bill affecting Oregon itself :
and the honorable member from Missouri (NIr
l5enton) was right, precisely right, when he said
mat the amendment now under consideration had
no relation to Oregon That is perfectly true and
therefore the amendment which the Senate has a.
dopted and the House has disagreed TO, has moth
ing In the world TO do with Oregon The truth
lsr that is an amendment by which the Senate wish
to have apublic, legal declaration, not respecting
Oregon but respecting the newly acquired teri
| torres OF Cali 1ornia and New Mexico 1t wishes
now to make line Of slavery for those terri
tories. The amendment says that this line of the
Missouri Compromise shall be the line to the
Pacific and then goes on say, in the language of
the bill as itnow stands that the Ordinance of sc
shall be applicable to Oregon; and therefore say
that the amendment proposed is foreign to the inn
mediate object of the bill 1t does nothing to
modify restrain effect, In any way the govern
ment which we propose to establish over Oregon,
or the condition character ofthat government or
OF the people under it. In parliamentary view,
nc iS tho a.f+l1
Now sir, this amendment has been attached to
The bill by strong majority of the Senate That
majority had the right it had the power to
pass it. The House disagreed to that amendment
Well, If the majority OF the Senate who attached
IT to the bill are of opinion that conference with
the House will lead to some adjustment of the
question by which this amendment or something
equivalent to 1t, may be adopted by the House it
is very proper for them to urge a conference 1t
Is very fair, quite parliamentary, and there is not
word to be SAID against 1T. But my position Is
that of one who voted against the amendment-
who thinks that it ought not TO be attached this
bill, and therefore | naturally vote for the motion
to get rid of it-that is, ito receden
SO much for the parliamentary question. Now
there are two or three questions arising IN this
case, which wish to state dispassionatey--no to
argue, but to state.
The honorable member from Georgia (Mr
Berrlen) for whom have great respect and with
whom it is my delight to cultivate personal friend
ship, has stated, with great propriety the impor-
lance of the question. He has said that it is a
question interesting to the South and to the North
and one which may very well, also attract the at
tention of mankind He has not stated all this too
strongly. 1t is such question. Without doubt
1t is question which may well attract the atten-
ton of mankind. On the subjects involved in this
debate, the whole world is now asleep. 1t is wide
awake; and | agree with the honorable member
that If what is now proposed to be done by us
who resist thus amendment is as he supposes I'M
just and injurious to any portion of this commu-
nifty, that injustice should be presented to the civ
lllzed world, and we who concur in tn proceeding
ought to submit ourselves to its rebuke | am
glad that the honorable gentlemen proposes TO re-
Ter this question to the great tribunal of civiliza
? uon as well as to the great tribunal of the Anne
ncan people. 1t is proper. 1t is a question OF
magnitude enough = of interest enough to all
the civilized nations ofthe earth to call from those
who support one side or the other statement OF
! the grounds upon when they act
+ Now, propose TO state, as briefly as can. the
grounds upon which proceed, historical and con
stitutional, and will endeavor to use as few words
as possIble so that may relieve the Senate from
hearing me at the earliest possible moment
lnthe first place, to view the matter historically
This constitution founded in 1897 and the gov
eminent under it, organized in 1889 does recog
nize the existence of slavery in certain States
then existing in the Union; and particular de
I scription of slavery | hope that what am about
to say may be received without any suppositior
J that L intend the slightest disrespect But this
particular description of slavery does not | be
leve, now exist IN Europe nor in any other civil
lIZed portions OF the habItable globe. 1t is not q
| Predial Slavery 1t is not analogous to the CASE
of the Predial Slaves, slaves gleba adseriDi O
Russia, or Hungary, other States 1t is a ne
culiar system of personal slavery, bv which the
person who IS called slave is transferable as a
chattel, from hand to hand | speak of this as :
fact And that is the fact and Will say farther
-perhaps other gentlemen may remember thu
instances-that although slavery, as system O
servItude attached to the earth, existed i'm various
countries of Europe, | ann not at the present mo
ment aware of any place on the globe in which thu
/ property of in human being as a slay,
transferable chattel exists, except in certain
g States of this Union, and the West India Islands
Now, that existed at the formation of this Con
stituton, and the trainers of that instrument ane
E those who adopted 1t, agreed that as far as II ex
listed it should not be disturbed interered witt
I by the new general government. There is NJ
doubt OF that
The Constitution of the United States recoeni
yes it as an existing fact-an existing relation be
tween the inhabitants of the Southern States
do not call it am institution. because that tern
is not applicable to it; for that seems TO imply
voluntary establishment. have been here so Ions
that when first came here it was a matter OF re
proach TO England, the mother country, that slave
, ry had been entaedupon the Colonies against then
| consent, and that which is now considered cher
ished " institution was then regarded as | vii
not say an entailed erH but an entailment on tn,
Colonies by the policy of the mother country
aginst their wishes AT any rate, it stands upor
! the Constitution. The Constitution was adopted
IN 17SS, and went into operation in 1880 Wher
it was adopted the state Of the country was this
Slavery existed in the Southern States: there was
, very large extent of Unoccupied territorv-the
, whole Northwest-which it is understood was
destined TO be formed into States: and it was de-
termined that no slavery should exist in this terri
tory northwest of the OHIO / .ratl.,-