The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-12
CONGRESSIONAL.



Remaks spon The cdm,ssion Of California connerion
sSah hs speech Of Hon Mr. Walker. of Wisconsin.
Mr., DAVIS The senator from Wisconsin has refer
red so frequently to the senator from Mississippi, calling
my attention to what he ab1 say that think il
necessary, without intending fully to reply TO him.
to show how unfairly he has treated what said in
the Senate on former OCCASION
Mr.. WALKER beg TO assure the honorable senator
that did mol intend 10 treat him unfairly.
MIR. DAVIS will say 10 The senator from Wisconsin
that am glad 10 hear his statement that be did not intend
TO do ~ and yet his presentdon OF what said is such
as 70 do me great njastlcei bai II being unnlentona
without commentary or preliminary remark, Will merely
read those gassagss q ,hs speech upon which hs argn
toiore 10 what has been said by him in relation
thereto the present occasion II will show that be has
not quoted what did say but something that he has
Mr. WALKER. The mos. material part Of what
quoted from him from different speech from the
one he holds IN his hand published in the Union Of the
Mr. DAVIS. The senator heretofore referred 10 what
had said in relation to the Missouri compromise an.
swered him on that occasion; and on receiving the
pamphlet edition OF my remarks 10 avoid the possibility
that he had misunderstood me, assured myself that he
had copy OF my Speech and called his attention 10 il
containing full explanation oi my views upon that sub
ect And ii knowing my opinions he has represented me
otherwise leave it TO him to explain In this speech,
when treating Of what claimed by the North as the
proper action Of the federal government in relation 10 the
exclusion OF the slaves OF the southern States from the
Territories and the grounds upon which il was done,
said:
In its nature, and derives its existence from municipal law
Slavery existed before the formation Of this Union II de-
not have enjoyed without the confederation u the States
had noa united together there would have been no obga
ton adjoining States regard any species OF properly
nnknown % themselves But IL one 81 the conpro-
q M ss e Z s
the United States twas recognised IN The obs alton
in their representation in The halls Of
Congress- properly recognised by the constitutions
and held IN portion oil ths States, The federal
bound admit into all the Territories and % give
such protection as other private properly receives
That was my argument ] appeal to the senator
whether his remarks upon that portion o my speech
fairly applied 70 the text.
Mr. WALKER. If the senator please. did no, quote
from that speech
under the constitutions alter having acquired this territory
from Mexico to carry any species Of property into that
Territory any law having prior exis-
ience which prohibited It's Introduction, | sad
I'll the right OF the stakeholder Migrate the Terri
tories, and carry this species of property there pro
trader 70 enter there with any OF those sixty arces Of com
mefce likewise prohibited and the privilege which every
does exist Of right But right of trade through
the United States is derived om the constitution, and
country s United aes That equally applies
he ansis q slave properly from .hs dGmie o The owner
laws in force this subject than the
twas because the constitution overrode t,ese prohbi
tory laws that free trade exists because the
nsss. so . n .sa and o ss
Safes that we claim the abolition Of slavery by Mexico
ss,es By the anssr o. she sri,oy he soyereisn,y Of
Mexico was Withdrawn; the sovereignty OF the United
sd IL pscea sovepsaay % Se measured by our
iu,ion, not BY the policy Of Mexico"
The surely did not that position, but
10 position which he seems TO have imagined s.
sumed in relation 10 the Missouri compromise. The
senator spoke as though was claiming something
treme, demanding recognition OF night which had
not heretofore asserted and taking ground higher
than the South has heretofore maintained Now will
make other argument than read part OF the speech
70 which he referred had been previously miscon-
ceved II had been asserted that had claimed that
Congress should establish slavery portion of this
territory, and had previously had TO explain this point
said:
But sir because on a former OCCASION stated what
believed to be constitutional rights, bat that there
Were two great antagonist principles Ia this country the
claiming that slavery shall be excluded from all tbs
Territories and the other consnding stakeholder
right 10 with their property into all OF the Territories,
csd as compromIse was Only 70 Be found in division Of
the property that would
prsvsi and the side the oher should be ecog-
nscdbecause stated this, and because suggested that
in peace together should be dvidsd was charged win
the desire establish slavery where Il does
the Tsnory and said would not recognise your right to
exclude i,om any portion Of h.; for was Wiling
see the controversy, and incur the hazard Of taking
Missouri compromise line division, waving the ques
.on q right woald agree . any eompfomlse adsqusis
then go on TO state what was the case when this Mis-
sour compromise line was applied 10 the Territory o
Louisiana, which was slave territory. The line OF 80
deg 30 min. drawn through the territory, aod when
slavery prohibited north OF that line the division
complete II was unnecessary 10 say anything about the
country below, because saying nothing slavery existed
heretofore. II decided by making a division OF
the territory between the savehoding and the non
savehodng States have said that in this case where
the whole territory in dispute there should be dis
uact application the side and the other In or
der that might have the full benefit OF ths spirit Of the
Missouri compromise, in unlike that for which il
made that the citizens Of the United States were
engaged in controversy 10 the right 10 take paric-
ular species Of property into the Ternores that this
oontroversy-so painful, injurious, aud dangerous in
its tendency aud seemingly irreconcabe-might be
adjusted without compromise OF principle by division
Of the territory between the two sections OF the Union
the 10 have sole possession above and the other Il
have equal possession below the line For sir wher
you admit slavery the Territory, you do not exclude
The white laborer Il Is great fsacy, which has beer
repeatedly here promulgated, 10 suppose No, sir
slave labor forms the suosfraium which white labor il
elevated and be who seeks for that portion OF coun
Try where fact in theory, political equality does
isl, be pointed 10 the sIaveholdng States Such
at least know be the among all the white
where reside and such cannot believe TO be the
where, in the slave States, white men are sunk
4 menIal occupations.
But SIR the senator has noticed some closing remark
Of that speech, which hoped would have had tendenc,
rather 10 quiet than 20 excite controversy Expression
was given 10 the feelings which have always enter
famed OF abiding love for all portions Of the country
and petty sectional hostility toward any has ever founs
shelter in my breast Even that portion Of my remark.
The senator has thought proper comment on snd,
fhawk .-l. r.