The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-15

cesTe Tor lis settlement terms satisfactory 10 the whole
siny; ana protesting against the anti slavery policy
ad NE Non essay 70 force on the government Of
United states he urged the friends of California 10
asa,n oing forward the Clayton Compromises bill as
settlement OF the whole question. 10 which be pledged
% ana ne protested against the course Of those
uIg'ns inc poicy OF non Intervention, after having APP
sopnated large share OF the territory acquired from
Mexico TO the North Mr.. H. also argued al length the
her, which he held 10 be good beyond dispute He fur
lhef warned the committee that In case OF the admission
q California as her friends urged her on the Union
70 suit herself and the South only He asked but for
Justice TO the South, and declared that owing allegiance
to his State he should go with her course she
might take on being driven TO the wall as was being
proposed He Tor honorable settlement and was
willing to make concessions, and held himself ready 10
on the only admissible scheme and should acquiesce
in any settlement OF the question to which Texas might
assent But until she had accepted the plan just adopted
me Senate as Georgia representative, he should feel
/. Mr. PEASLEE next addressed the committee n favor
OF the CLAIM Of New Hampshire for interest the money
spent BY her, on account OF the general government In
the northeasiern boundary difficulty.
Mr. WOODWARD then addressed the committee, ar.
gung that 70 late period all parties had acknowledged
the right OF Texas 70 the disputed territory He held that
those who charged the opponents OF the Clay eompo-
mise scheme, who sustained the Clayton scheme, with
the two measures totally denied the validity Of The Mex
can law prohibiting slavery in the territory we have ac-
CURED from that government and went to show that
holder, on taking his property there, would have been
amply protected in its enjoyment while under the Clay
proposition he would be at the mercy Of laws against
slavery passed by the newcomers from the North, &c.
congegaed there. That particular scheme, he went on
to, show, designated as California much territory
which hers, and denied to Texas large strip
OF Texas which clearly hers
MI next turned TO the question OF the title OF Tex.
as to the disputed territory, and maintained that il rested
on the provisions of the laws OF nations being from con-
quest and by contguy, and he also held that under the
laws OF nations she justified in seeking it, because
as necessary to hertertorai completeness He
argued 10 prove that the resolution of annexation put the
validity OF the claim OF Texas beyond dispute and held
that Gen Cass in the Nicholson letter had insisted this
fact Under the resolutions, the general government
only authorized to settle the boundary question with
Mexico, as the agent OF Texas Yet she had become not
only claimant under Texas the injury OF the party
whose rights she had undertaken to defend. but had as
sumed to be judge. and in her own right, setting up u
rsdicton never before dreamed Of
Mr. w next went on to show that the Executive, but
co ordinate branch Of the government could not super
wise the power, and assume obligations
der it, and then decide without act OF Congress what
those obligations were.
He then TO show that there sovereign
y in the general government and that the real sovereign
~ under the constitution rested in the people assembled
State convention and then he proceeded to describe the
enormity OF the claim OF the Executive sovereign
powers, involved in portions OF the message.
On motion OF Mr. CASEY, the committee rose; when
MIR. SCHENCK offered resolution to close the de-
bate on the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill on
Tuesday next, at ~ m; and then,
On motion, the House adjourned.