The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-01-30


Mr. RUsK aid he aid not inland ~ a;.c,,.. ,h...
resolutions but had simply arose to sav tbat he re-.
GREETED that The Senator from, ~ - ,hsr ~
ceremon,ouslv should "a he one half Of ths STATE he
represented and give il as peace offering n the
enirit Of encroaehment uno, the ,.s
rrhts Of the south When The
he would undertake to prove thai the rio C,ande
was the true boundary al Texas. III thst this Con-
gress had no power without the consent Of Texas 10
divide her, or to alter her limits.
Mr. FOOTE said there was somethin9 In the
resolution which declared Il inc 70 abolish
slavery in the District of Columbis that was NOT
altogether suitable 10 his views. That resolution
might be 30 construed as 10 admit the power Of
Congress to do so He did not belieye Congress
had such power. He did not approve Of the reso-
luton about Texas: there WINS bill now before the
Senate To divide that State bv the creation of new
one While he admired the protest entered bv the
Senator from Texas, he thought it but proper
that the resolutions should be carefully considered
before discussed He referred to the action of Con-
gress on the resolutions of 1885, when it was there
held by the South that Congress had no power to
abolish slavery in the District
Mr.. CLAY replied to the two Senators briefly,
and then Messrs. FOOTE and CLAY continued the
debate upon the nature and character of the resolu
tons Of 1888.
Mr.. MASON said he was not willing that any
one should suppose that he, or the State he repre-
scented, should be considered as conceding to the
propositions submitted by the Senator from Ken
lucky. He regretted that Senator from q slave
holding State should have introduced such propOsi-
tons. There could be no compromise where every
concession was to be made by one party. He was
glad the Senator differed from the administration
to the subjects treated Of in the late message.
He could never vote for resolution which asserted
that slavery did not at this time exist in the terri
tories He believed the Senator was actuated by
the noblest motives in introducing his PROPOSE
ton; but he was surprised that such proposition
should have been introduced by q southern Senator
As to the resolution about fugitive slaves, it was
very well but where was the guarantee that it
would be observed? Tho Constitution itself was
disrcgarded that subject. There were other pro-
positions in the resolutions for which he could never
vote
Mr.. DAVIS, of Mississippi, said he had differ
ent impression of the action of Congress in 1885,
about the abolition OF slavery in the District Of Co.
lumbia, from that entertained on the other side.
Mr.. d. then read from the Journal, 10 show that
resolution declaring that the abolition Of slavery in
the District Of Columbia would be dangerous to all
the slave States Of the Union. The resolutions Of
the Senator from Kentucky departed from the doc
trine laid down twelve years ago. He was opposed
to several OF the propositions contained in the reso-
lutions. He saw no compromise in them. The
concessions were all on one side. He could vote
for no resolution which declared that slavery did
not exist in the territories That doctrine had been
held and proven by the South, and had been intro
duced In an amendment at the last session by the
other Senator FROM Kentucky, (Mr. UHDEawooD-)
In conclusion he would say, that he would accept
of no compromise short of the Missouri line to Sc