The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-15
CONGRESSIONAL.
sPEEoH or mR. WALKER,
on WISCONSIN,,
In ths Senate, on Fgiday. TIE sM instant.

The resolutions OF proposed compromise submitted by
Mr. CLAY being under consideration,
Mr. WALKER resumed and concluded as follows:
Mr. PRESIDENT: come SIR, to treat OF this ques.
ton in Of its general features Il Is contended
upon general principles BY our friends OF the South that
under the general law OF the equality OF property they
have the right to enter the acquired Territories and 70
take with them their property the same manner that
the citizens of other States have the right e take lneis
Without going at any great length into this subject
think there this many falacies which might easily
be exposed The principal faacy is this; That the
right to the involuntary servnde Of the slave not as
claimed. (as have shown by The Judicial authorities OF
the slave States,) natural universal right Il is not
right according 10 the law oi nature or according 70 ihe
unwritten common law Il brings then, to the conciu-
sion that slavery is local institution, peculiar 70 the
States in which 1t exists. II has extrG territorial in
faencs q extent whatever And when our ~ friends &
Mexico to any other territory oi the UNITED States they
are claiming nothing less. has been frequently
remarked Congress, than the right take their local
laws Or local institution do not, cannot see how
they decide among them selves which OF their To-
cal institutions TO 60 Are they to be the local instl
tutons OF the Staes which the slave s made part OF
the realty where the slave escends with the real estate
or the institutions oil State where he is personal
property Ist TO be the institutions by which the slave
code OF criminal laws existsi These difficulties
be settled among themselves; and brings me TO this
conclusion; that any o the free States might just as
well claim have It's institutions carried there as the
South There States whicn have institutions OF as pc.
cuara character perhaps as The Institution q slavery
s as term a ks f. E ss vss sss
New York: she has institution in which she has
property Of much pecnniary value invested as any
her general banking institution Should we not think
an en0rmty-w0uld not the South think il an absurdty
if the State Of New York should claim that she had
right to 60 with her banking property into the Territories
o the United States merely because that her prop
ery in her State Would It not be an enormty IT
New York, not being permitted TO do this, should be con-
tnuay threatening both in and ont Of Congress- 10 dis
solve the American Union! But gentlemen OF the slave
States 10 be unwilling 70 recognise the local instltu
tons Of their sister States. while they claim that theirs
shall be recognised to the fullest extent deduce from
this the Argument that the constitution OF the United
States, regard to slavery, 0verdes and abro-
gates the laws Of California which existed at the time Of
the acquisition for the benefit Of slavery than for the
benefit Of the banks OF New York, OF the lotteries
of some other States OF this Union
ry il must override and abrogas em in favor Of free
schools. banking institutions, lottery institutions, and
other institutions OF various States in the Union; for
Just as much recognised by The constitution as the nsi
tuition Of slavery, and great deal for they do not
require the constitution Of the United States 10 impose
upon Congress the States the Injunction TO surrender
their property; but il be surrendered species OF
property existing by virtue OF the laws of nature, the
common law, you please, under the general comfy OF
nations, without any constitutional guaranty Tor the
purpose They stand, then, upon broader basis rmer
bass than the institution OF slavery, except in the local
district where 1t exists.
spp lMr DAv,l and other senators. quote the cores
pondence between MIR Tis and Mr. Buchanan, to prove
tnot e10vey existed Dy the laws Oh Mexico tnat
respondence proves anything proves conclusiyey that
slavery then abolished and did not exist by law Let
Us turn attention to The language of the extract
which has been read
the exclusion Of slavery from all territory which should
pass from Mexico 10 The course Of their remarks on the
the United Sa.e. 70 part with portion Of their In
o ae
those awakened in Mexico by the prospect Of the
ou h wss as no
less friendly and the more effective upon their minds in
asmucn :. was enabled 70 say WIN peIecs security thas
slavery, as /. existed IN the United siaes were had no
snce between my individual views and sentiments on
slavery considered in ITSELF and those which they enter
Now sir, il we owned portion Of territory in which
the inquision sritsd, and about to cede il TO
other power, would 1t excite any very strong feelings OF
0bhorrence that il 10 be introduced there Not at
all Why, then. did il excite adherence in Mexico that
slavery might be introduced into The territory but for
the consideration that slavery had been there abolished,
that the chains had been taken off, and The slaves been
rendered reemeni Adherence excited lest il should
be introduced proposition to allow to remain, il IL
exssfsd, would have excited adherence at all They
feared that slavery would be introduced when the
ritory passed from under the free OF Mexico
And this Is the correspondence brought TO show that sa
very did, in fact. exist II II did, Il was folly for
the Mexican commissioner TO speak OF any adherence
was somewhat amused, after the senator from Mis-.
sssipPi had spent 50 much time IN proving that Ella.
the second day of his speech go TO show how much
Mexico had been degraded since the abolition Of SLAVERY
in that country. He speaks thus:
81 therefore deny what is affirmed by the senator from
Kentucky his secbnd truth, and cain in evidence OF
that denial the produce Of Mexico when slavery
istsd there, far beyond what IL is at present
Mexic1 has, abolition Of slavery sunk into her
present Impoverished condition, that derive money for
her support sold her enory United States and
s proof be denied Of the value Of the ins
tion Of slavery in soil and climate like hers"
This sounded to me very much like unsayng all the
senator had said.
II the position OF things is have staedif slavery
and the slave trade have been aboished--f slavery
and the slave trade have been prohibited and that not
only according the decision OF the Supreme Court, but
OF the courts OF the slave States themselves where those
laws Of abolition and prohibition in forcewhat
is the Stale o things that we arrive att The senator
from Mississippi answers the question when he makes
use of the following language:
sWhy, sir, what choice IL ,ere between this and the
Wlmof Proviso1 J. for one, would pre- fer the Wlnot
Provso. Idemur. SIR, alter the House had killed the Will
Proviso pgainst claim dukedon for hun who
brings etss corpse into the Senate and Least OF
have any thanks TO the senator from III nois for
siaenis, in opposing the WIImot Proviso-that had
application because slavery being already excluded from
the Territories, Il wholly unnecessary to prohibit Il
by
fer because tue advocate Of the Wmot Proviso attempts
rob OF my rights whilst acknowledging that by the
admission, requires legislation 70 deprive me OF them
The other denies their existence."
agree with the senator from Mississippi, perfectly
that the Wmo Provso il better for him, but for very
different reason from the unkind which he gives II
s not because the Wimo Povso would rob him OF any.
thing. but because il the burden OF the afrma-
tive By those who would restrict slavery while my po-
sition and doctrine would throw The affirmative on