The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-22

DC CONSUMERS tndt ne would De oDNKed thinking AZ ne
does. to 90 for proposition which would be noga,ory
five right when the effect OF the adoption OF his
proposition, bv taking away from those OF our northern
US in regard to The Mexican law h he reasons voting
with u.s. would be 10 lose them without acquiring any
friends for the bill
Mr. DAVIS VIII the senator permit me-
Mr. PRATT. I am just about 10 conclude
MIR DAVIS Il was TO show the point that aim at,
that wished the floor ~. .,.oa.;,,a. ~.
President-and desire to make further arguments
lust this agree with my friend that this law which he
by he very fact OF the acquisition Of the Territory Now.
he asks and expects to vote with him for this nugao
~ legislation, when he knows that the effect OF IFS adop
ton without getting him. anybody who acts with him,
10 vote for the BILL will drive away oil the northern
friends OF the bill. All | desired was to explain to my
constituents The reason OF my vote upon this bill.
MIR. DAVIS, OF Mississippi. was unfortunate in my
expression. did not intend 10 intimate to the,senator
that his remarks were not sufficiently pointed rose
merely to direct the attention Of the senator what
thought to be the point do not ask any to
render his opinions this questions qaiie the reverse
say that the opinions OF those who adverse to me,
and for whose judgment have high respect, influence
my confidence in my opinion. Iconsder those opn-
ions throwing cloud oil doubt the right, which
would prevent its exercise do not ask those who think
say that il is repealed Whatever opinions they may
tertanwhether they consider that the Mexican laws are
in force notl only ask what am at loss TO know.
how American refuse that there be repeal OF such
laws obstruc the full enjoyment OF the rights OF
American citizens which founded resulting from,
ii not secured by the constitution OF the United States
Mr.. FO0TE II does seem that we agree one point
at least thought there could be difference OF opin
ion to this point and that would all readily agree
that the constitution Of the United States as part oil
the supreme law OF the land in its auhori
ty with the territorial surface Of the Union II So it fol-
lows, Of course that all local laws repugnant where
it is thus operative, null and VOID. No sound
mind escape this conclusion Now, by this very bill,
in addition to what has been done by The treaty itself and
the act ct conquest we propose to extend the constitution
Of the United States 10 these Territories. Does any
doubt then, that the constitution, beng thus extended
Ill laws parts OF laws now existing, or which may
hereafter exist these Territories rrpagnant to rights
OF property protected by the constitution of the United
States, fall 10 the earth at and become utterly ex
tnct and noperatvei This being at least my view
OF the matter, and that which have constantly enter
tanned il is impossible that could attach the least i'm
porance the amendment under consideration, which,
though innocent enough in itself and unquesonaby well
intended have possible effect whatever in martng
security TO constitutional rights not already enjoyed.
cannot believe that there is member Of tins body who
will rise and say that when this act shall have been
passed. by which the constitution OF the United States lie
specially extended to these Territories the laws OF Mex
leo heretofore existing in these Territories repugnant 10
that instrument, will be able for single instant
of time say do not think any will declare this
opinion because absurd itself TO be expressed,
without exposing ourselves both TO ridcne and
tempt my colleague had been more specific should
have been able to perceive how something might be
tanned by its adoption, though could not have voted for
IN ns form alluded o. aS DC 70
have been already long since rescnded thus settling by
act Of Congress the questoa which this bill proposes to
ueClslOn--Wulistl
strict non-intevenon man, have voted with him, yet
should have been able to recognise such amendment
promising to the South or less OF contingent ben
e6t But repeat that the amendment can have such
effect at all 1t provides for a state of things which
does exist tprovdes that laws repugnant to the
constitution shall be recognised as having any existence
Again say that there Is no lawyer in America who
will contend that after the treaty with Mexico has ex
tended the constitution Of the United States to these Ter
ories and alter this very act has again extended to
them, in regard slavery the Territories, precisely
IL is without the least modification whatever any law
which is repugnant to the constitution can retain any
vitality there Whilst regard the amendment in this
light and consider j, incapable Of practical mischief il
should become part OF the bill under consideration yet
feel bound 10 declare, in all frankness that do most
seriously fear that the incorporation OF this amendment
into the bill will cause such Interpretation to be placed
upon it, both here and elsewhere, might occasion its
ultimate defeat, than which cannot imagine
greater national calamity admit that when my col
league showed II 10 yesterday, did examine il
far to perceive this objection but should be
grai6ed at his withdrawal Of it as if vote against
II. shall be liable to msconsuuction and if vote Tor
II, shall do chiefly from the desire which feel and
have constantly endeavored TO exhibit, to differ with
arespecied colleague upon points comparatively mma-
Mr. DAVIS. will Tell my colleague why cannot
concur with him This is an amendment which had
prepared to meet what considered the impedlment or
d6culty which might and should by law remove, il
it existed. Whether, unoer the constitution, had
right TO take slaves into Territory where slavery had
not been established by the local law, the question
on which was willing at a former time, and now, TO
rest the Supreme Court The amendment is another
cOnsloerauon MS Is the reason why INTRO
duced this amendment which shown 10 my colleague
yesterday and supposed we then agreed.
am not now holding my colleague TO any test OF
sistency any obligations Of understanding which
believe he and had yesterday. His proposition
would 20 10 the extent OF an amendment which would
be declaring what constitutional rights are could
not admit that power to be in Congress
MIR FOOTE. | conceived there was some ground for
supposlng that something might be accomplished by this
amendment Such amendment have heretofore op.
posed in this body, because conceived opposed 10 the
general principle OF the bill.
Mr. DAVIS. Then my colleague suggests to an
position al least agree. have not asked that Con-
gress should declare what ourghs in the Territories are
and, as have more than stated have DISPOSE
nonno, sir could consent-to allow the Congress
10 decide what the constitutional rights OF the South
and no far they extend claim those rights privileges
and mmuntes to which every American citizen is enii.
ted only ask that such laws OF Mexico as obsiruct
these rights shall be removed That seems TO me 10 be
very different proposition fom asking the Senate de-
clare what our constitutional rights are Now SIR when
he who believe is considered the first lawyer in the
Senate, the first in the United S,aesl refer to a senator
not in his sea'-hss informed that II IA his opn.
ion that the local law does remain, modest man.
must feel some doubt, however well assured am in my
position. When the senator IRON Kentucky, IMr CLAY
whose authority certainly high 10 this body, and high
all over the country that the Ter loci does remain
belongs to younger and humber somewhat TO hest
tate to the correctness OF their opinions; and il
not 10 the correctness OF their opinions. they least
should consider what effect such dica may have upon
the property holder, who would migrate with his slave
property into that territory This is the most delicate
species Of property that Is held II is property that is
bulafIve properly which must be held under special
laws ond police regulations, render II useful or proa