The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-02-14

session of the following articles. They
appeared recently in papers published in the
city of New York. We were desired to re-
publish some of them in the Era, but the
crowded state of the paper obliges us 10
throw them into an EXTRA. Judge Jays
Letter was published in the New YORK
Epeninq Post. 1t has excited considerable
attention there, and will, we doubt not, IN
other parts Of the country. In argumen.
and style it is worthy of its distinguished
author.
REVIEW OF CLAY'S COMPROMISE.
Letter 10 Hon. WILLIAM NELSON, NJ u,
from WILLIAM JAY.
New YORK, llth February, 1871.
My DEAR SIR AS one OF your lmmedia'e
constituents permit me to express 10 you my
views on the resolutions lately submitted to Inc
Senate by Mr.. Clay. They are skillfully drawn
and their true import seems to me to be generally
misunderstood, and in many instances iniention-
ally misrepresented. Various considerations
combine to render these resolutions acceptable to
that class of eur northern politicians, who are
anxious to be popular at home, without FORGETTING
their share of the patronage which is dispensed
at Washington, by the slave power. The reso-
lutions are eight in number, and will examine
them in their order.
l. This proposes the admission of California
as State, without the imposition by Congress
of any restriction on the subject of slavery, and
"lcih suitable boundaries" These words imply
that the present boundaries are unsuitable, and
must be altered. Let me now call your attention
to the true reason for this reservation about boun-
daries, and respecting which the resolution is
silent During the war, and before the cession
of any territory, the House of Representatives
passed the Wilmot Proviso, prohibiting slavery
in oil the territory that might be acquired. On
this the South, with one voice. declared that they
would not submit to the exclusion of slavery
south Of $500. The Legislature of Alabama re-
solved that they would not recognize "any
enactment of the Federal Government which has
for its object the prohibition of slavery in any
territory to be acquired by conquest or treaty
SOUTH of the line of the Missouri compromise"
AT public meeting in Charleston, and at which
believe Mr.. Calhoun was present, it was re-
solved that it would be debasing and dishonor-
able to submit to the prohibition of slavery "be-
yond what is already yielded by the Missouri
compromised" and innumerable have been the
offers and efforts of Southern politicians to ex-
tend the compromise line to the Pacific. Hence
it is not the exclusion of slavery in California to
the north of that line that ofends the South and
to admit this anti-slavery State, bounded on the
south by $3.50, is doing no more than what the
South has consented should be done, and is in no
sense compromise. But the free State of Cali
fornia extends south of this line, and hence her
southern boundary is unsuitable and hence Mr..
Clay's resolution makes tacit provision for de-
priviDg the State of so much OF her territory as
his Southern friends have resolved shall not be
consecrated to freedom. Mr.. Foote, OF Missis-
sippi, observed in relation to this very resolu-
ton, 81 see no objection to admitting all Califor
MIA ADORE the line of $500 into the Union, pro-
vided another new slave State be laid off within
the present limits of Texas" To this laying off
another new slave State Mr.. Clay's compromise
opposes no obstacle Had Mr.. Clay proposed
the admission Of California with -"its present
boundaries" his offer would SO far have been
compromise, as TO concede something to freedom
as consideration for the surrender of the Will
mot Proviso.
g. The next resolution declares, that "ds slav-
cry does not erst by iar, and is not likely to be in
troduced" into any of the conquered territories
they should be organized under territorial gov
ernments, without any restriction on the subject
of slavery. The proposed assertion by Congress
that slavery does not exist by lap in the terrific
RES is hailed as an all-sufcient balm to the con-
sciences of those who recoil with horror at the
idea of being in any degree responsible for the
extension of human bondage. And what, let me
ask, is this declaration, but the enunciaton of a
bald truism7 We all know there is no law,
Mexican or American, recognizing slavery in the
territories. Mr.. Clay ,adroitly avoids drawing
any inference from this acknowledged fact, but
expects that the good people of the North will
draw for themselves the inference, that because
slavery does not exist by law, therefore it is pro-
exist by ld,o in New York, but still it exists, be-
cause it is not prohibited by law. Mr.. Clay well
knows that Mr.. Calhoun and the great mass of
the shareholders contend that in the absence of
prohibuory la,c, men, women and children, as
well as horses and sheep, may be held as proper
ty in any territory in the United States; and this
doctrine Mr.. Clay himself nowhere denies. Nay,
further, MIR. Calhoun insists and believe truly,
that slavery neuer has been established by lar in
any country-that after property in man has
been acquired, then, and not before, laws are
passed TO protect it. The shareholders ask for
no act of Congress authorizing them to carry
their property into the territories All they ask
is that no prohibitory law shall be passed, and
then they will carry their slaves where they
please, and keep them by their own strong hand
without law, till in their territorial legislatures
they shall pass such laws on the subject as they
shall find needful. Not word in Mr.. Claws
compromise contravenes this legal theory, or
prevents its reduction to practice. Slavery did
once exist by law in these territories: why does
1t not now' Mr.. Clay answers the question by
telling us that Mexican law abolished it. Now be
perfectly well knows that the Mexican law not
only abolished but prohibited slavery II that law
was repealed by the conquest, then the old law was
revived and slavery does now ernst by law. II the
law was notrepealed by the conquest, then the law
sull IN force and slavery is nor prohibited by lav.
why then does not Mr.. Clay fairly and honestly
declare mat slavery is now prohibited bv law
because this would indeed be . comoror,;..