Daily Richmond times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1849-1850, 1850-02-12
THE SLAVERY QUESTION.
MR.. CLAWS COMPROM MISE.
In SENATE, FEB'y 5, 1850
CONTINUED

Now, these two resolutions which we have imned-
ately under consideration propose decision Of these
questions have said SIR that there is scarcely
luton In the series which have offered that does not
contain some mutual concession evidence of mutual
forbearance, where the concession not altogether
from the non-slaveholding to the Slaveholdug States
NOW With respect to this resolution proposing aboun-
Diary tor Texas, what is it, We know the difference
OF opinion which has existed in this country with
spect to that boundary. We know that very large
portion OF the people Of the United States have supposed
that the western limit of Texas the Nueces and
that 1t did not extend to the Rio Grande We know
by the resolution OF annexation that the question OF
what is the western limit and the northern limit of Texas
was an open question that it has been all along an
open question 1t was open question when the boun
Diary num- virtue OF the act OF 1885, marking the
boundary between the United States and Texas Sir
at that time the boundary authorized by the act of 1888
boundary commencing at the mouth of the Sabine
and running up to its head thence to Red river, thence
westwardly with Red river to, think, the hundedth
degree of west longitude Well, sir, that did not go
open question. War yet raging between Texas
and Mexico; and it not foreseen exactly what might
be her ultimate limits; But, sir, we will come to the
question OF what done the time other annexation
This whole resolution which relates to the question Of
| boundary, from beginning to end, assumes an open
boundary, an unascertained, unfxed boundary to
of the resouton7 1t is that Congress doth consent
that the territory properly included within and right
| fully belonging to the Republic Of Texas, may be
erected into new State" Properly included in
| boundary. 1t could specify none. 1t has specified
no western northern boundary for Texas 1t has
| sumed in this state OF uncertainty what know in
point OF fact existed But then the latter part of -
Sad State to be formed subject the adjustment of all
questions OF boundary that may arise with other Gov
ernments, and the constitution thereof &c. That to
say she is annexed with her rghu and proper bounda
res, without specification of hem but inasmuch
was known that these boundaries at the west and the
north were unsettled, the Government OF the United
States retained to itself the power of settling with any
| FOREIGN nation what the hOundary should he
Now, sir, it is impossible for 90 into the whole
question and to argue it fully | mean to express OPT
mons or impressions rather than to into the entire
gument. The western and northern limit of Texas be-
ng unsettled and the Government of the United States
having retained the power OF settling it, ask suppose
the power had been exercised and that there had been
no cesson Of territory by Mexico to the United States
but that the negotiations between the two countries had
been limited simply to the hxation of the western and
northern limits of Texas, could have been done by
| the United States and Mexico conjointyl Will any
one dispute it! Suppose there had been treaty of IL
mits of Texas concluded between Mexico and the U.
States fixing the Nueces the western limit of Texas,
would not Texas have been bound by it! Why by the
express terms of the resolution she would have been
bound by it, Or if it had been the Colorado or the Rio
Grande, any other boundary, whatever western limit
had been fixed BY the Joint action of the two Powers,
the express terms of the resolution by which she was
admitted into the Union Now, sir, if Mexico and the
United States conformity by treaty, might have fixed
the U. States have acquired by treaty all the subjects
upon which the limits OF Texas might have operated have
not the u States the power sole and exclusively
which Mexico and the U. States conformity possessed
prior to the late treaty between the two countries. 1t
seems to me, that this conclusion and reasoning
perfectly irresistible. If Mexico and the United States
could have fixed upon any limit for Texas and
did do it, and if the United States have acquired to
themselves acquired by the treaty question: all the
territory upon which the western limit must have been
fixed, when it was fixed, it seems to that can
resist the logical conclusion that the United States
have themselves power to do what the United States
and Mexico conformity could have done.
Sir admit it is delicate power-an extremely de-
licate power admit that it ought to be exercised
spirit OF justice, beray and generosity towards this
the youngest member Of the great American family
But here the is Possibly sir, upon that question
however offer no positive opnionpossbly, if the
United States to fix it in way unjust in the opin
ion Of Texas, and contrary to her rights, she might
bring the question before the Supreme Court of the Uni
cided. possibly, sir becausel am not of that
class of politicians who believe that every question is
competent and proper question tor the Supreme Court OF
any tribunal of that kind to try; great political questions
national territorial questions which transcend their
limits; for such questions their powers utterly ncom
petent. Whether this be of those questions not
shall decide; but will maintain that the United
States invested solely and exclusively with that
power which was common to both nations to fix as
CERTAIN and settle the western and northern limits of
Texas.
Sir the other day my honorable friend who represents
SO well the State OF Texas, said that we had
right to touch the limits of Texas than had touch
the limits OF Kentucky think that the illustra-
ton he gave usthat State isone and ndivsable and
that the General Government has right sever it.
agree with him. sir, in that; where the limits
tanned and CERTAIN where they undisputed and in
dsputable The General Government has no right nor
has any other earthly power the right interfere with
the limits OF State whose boundaries are thus fixed,
thus ascerained, known, and recognized The whole
power at least, to interfere with it is voluntary The
extreme may be put-one which l trust in God
may never happen in this naton-of conquered
ton and OF constitution adapting itself to the state OF
subjugation conquest to which has been reduced
and giving up whole States well parts of States,
in order to save from the conquerlng OF the nva
| der what remains Isay such power in case of ex-
tremity may exist. But admit that, short of such ex
trem,y, voluntarily, the General Government has no
right to separate State-to take portion of its terrific
ny from it, to regard it otherwise than integral
one and ndivsable and not to be affected by any egs
lation Of But then, assume what does not ex-
istin the Of Texas that these boundaries must be
known, ascerained, and indsputable With regard to
Texas, all open, all was unxed all is unfixed at
this moment, with respect to her limits west and north
of the Nueces.
But, sir, we gave fifteen millions of dollars for this
territory that bought, and God knows what costly
bargain to this distracted country il has been -
We gave fifteen millions ofdolars for the territory ceded
to us by Mexico. Can Texas justly fairly and honor
ably the Union and claim all that she has as
serted right to, without paying any portion of the ff
teen millions of dollars which constituted the consde-
ration OF the grant by the ceding nation to the United
States! She proposes no such thing She talks, in
deed about United States having been her agent her
trustee. Why, sir, the United States more her
agent her trustee than she the agent or trustee OF
the whole people of the United States Texas involved
herself in war Il mean to make this reproach--none,
none-upon the pas)-Texas brought herself into
state Of war; and when she got into that war, it was
not the war of Texas and Mexico but was the war of
the whole thirty United States and Mexico; twas war
in which the Government of the United States, which
created the hostlities much the trustee and agent
of the twenty nine other States composing the Union
as she was the trustee and agent of Texas And sir,
with respect to all these circumstanees-such for ex-
ample treaty with map annexed in the case of
individuals highly respected and eminent like the la
mened Mr.. Polk, late President OF the United States
whose opinion that he had right President OF
the United States in any character otherwise than as
have to act in concurrence with him-that he had no
right fix the boundary and asto the map attached to
the treaty it is sufficient say that the treaty itself is
SLANT from, heoinninu slhiact tho g.