The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-02-28

snow shoes. IL is q good lumber country fine
country in many respects, and it will be peopled
when our Northern people have nowhere else to
go, and s5me may prefer perhaps TO 20 there when
they could go elsewhere. But there was great
necessity, it was said, for Territorial Govern
ment there and my colleague Mr. Scbenck
really incurred good deal Of cepsure at the time,
because he insisted that we should be careful
what kind of a Government we provided for those
people, and that time should be allowed to exam
inc and perfect the bill The case was 80 urgent,
it was said, that the bill must be passed at once.
| am unwilling TO leave the people Of New
Mexico Deseret, &c, without law, or without Off
GERS duly authorized to administer the law. | am
unwilling to allow executive discretion az wide
scope there as it has had in California; and am
still more unwilling to allow the military Govern
ment that seems to be the only one that the
United States has provided for those people, to
continue longer Such things were bad enough
in time of war-they are intolerable in time of
peace.
Indeed, sir, so obviously proper is it that Con-
gress should provide a Territorial Government
for those people that some Of the wisest OF the
friends Of the Administration in Congress have,
in the face of the recommendations Of the Execu-
tive, expressed determination to bring in bill,
or bills, for that purpose and only regret that
they do not propose to have their bills contain
prohibition of slavery in all the territory but the
bills might be amended by inserting such prohi-
biton, if there were even in this House MAORI
ty in favor of it, | am for doing that. | believe
il to he not only the right but the duty Of Con-
gress TO insert such prohibition. believe we
have the authority to do it, and that majority of
the people of the United States desire that it
should be done; that it would be better for the
the United States, better for the people Of The
Territory, better in every respect that it should
be done. | will not enter into an argument here,
about the effect of the law of Mexico, the law OF
the country as it existed when we acquired It,
Suppose, strand | will not dispute the fact
that the law in and of itself prohibits slavery we
know that large and respectable portion Of the
people and of the peoples representatives, insist
that it does not exclude slavery. They claim
that the people of the slaveholding States have
the right to 90 there with their slaves, and hold
them as they could at home in their own States
While men of wisdom patriotism, and determin-
alton, hold that this is the fact, that this is the
clear law of that land that this is their undoubted
right and whilst they declare that they Will ex-
ercise that right we to be told that 1t is I'M
necessary and inexpedent to settle this vexed
question: However clear my own opinion may
be, since respectable portion Of my fellow
citizens entertain different opinion, will go for
settling the dispute for quieting the controversy,
for putting this bone Of contention out of the way
forever. 49,
Well, sir, what are the objections to the enact
ment of this prohibition against slavery in those
TerritOfies now freel Why should it not 'oe
done If majority of the people desire it, if
majorty of their Representatives and Senators
will vote for it, why should it not be done? let me
ask ooh, because it is disturbing question
because it will disturb the harmony of the coun-
try!D | strongly suspect that this argument is
based rather upon the fear that it will disturb the
harmony of party-that it is good deal more on
account of its disturbing the harmony of party
than the harmony of the country. Again it is
said that it would be aggression" upon the
slaveholding States and We are warned, solemn
ly warned, and exhcrted-gentlemen say they do
not intend to menace us-but to warn us to cease
our aggressions--the South will never submit TO
them Are not gentlemen mistaken as to the
fact of there ever having teen any aggressions
upon them? Why, who has been gaining most
relatively since the Constitution was adopted?
What kind of results have followed these long
continued aggressions on the South by the North
What was the state of things at the adoption Of
the Constitution? There were thirteen States
To be sure, slavery in some form still existed in
majority Of them; yet there were not to exceed
five that did not at that time contemplate an
almost immediate abolition of slavery within their
respective borders And, sir, there were not to
exceed three whose delegates in the convention
did not express the hope that the day was not far
distant when it would cease to exist entirely. |
do not say that they were unanimous in this ex-
preston There were men from Virginia and
from North Carolina, who expressed the wish
aud the hope that slavery should be abolished in
those States.
Mr.. Ashe nterposed, and wished Mr.. Root to
mention the name of any man from North Carroll
ma who, in the convention, expressed the hope
that slavery would be abolished in North Caro-
lima
Mr.. Root. 1t wasn't the gentleman, nor any of
his ancestors. A laugh think am correct
in the statement | have made but if there were
even four States whose delegates did not express
the hope that slavery would be abolished in their
States there was majority of anti-savery States.
There were all the New England States New
York, New Jersey, and Pennsy lvana, anti-slayery
States To be sure, New York, New Jersey, and
PENNSYLVANIA, had slaves, but they were all look
ing forward to the time when they would get rid
of slavery. IL was an ant-slavery convention /;
there was majority Of anti-slavery States repre-
scented in it. And what did the first Congress
that assembled under the Constitution do The
Representatives from oil the States acting to-
gether, provided for organizing Territorial Gov
eminent for the only Territory we then had, the
Northwest Territory for excluding slavery there
from and for creating FIVE additional States to be
formed out of that Territory, and every one of
them was to be n free State. SO that the anti
slavery States at that time outnumbered the slave
States and it must have seemed probable If not
certain, that the disproportion would shortly be-
come still greater. Certainly, the balance of
powerD WAS not deemed essential to the safety or
welfare of the slave States then. That is new
idea. At that time they could not and they did
not contemplate that there was ever TO be an
60 Stnto Ia, 81
Union But the acquisition of Louisiana, and
Florida, and Texas since-events which could
not then have been foreseen - gave the slave
States great advantages over the free States till
now after "sixty years of aggression by the
North upon the South" there are just as many
slave States as free States in the Union, and gen.
tlemen tell US that it would be an unheard.of out
rage for free State to be admitted into the
Union without, at the same time, admitting a
slave State.
may add, that the trainers of our Constitution
seem never TO have contemplated the acquisition
of territory from other nations. If they did,
they made no express provision for its disposition
and management Doubtless they had distinct
idea of what kind of authority might be exer-
cised under the war-making and treaty making
power But all the provisions of the Constitu-
ton relative to territory to refer to the ter
ritory which the United States then possessed
but it by no means follows that Congress has not
authority TO make laws for and to govern the ter
ritory we have acquired since Under the trea-
ty.making powerwe have both acquired and ceded
away territory, and yet it is claimed that the law
making power Of the United States may not gov
ern such territory. Sir it always has done it,
Southern Representatives and Senator'S and Pres
idents have assisted in doing it, and it is now too
late to urge that they have acted without au.
thority.
Indeed, the power to prohibit slavery 10 terri
tory belonging to the United States has been ex-
ercised by Congress again and again, and just as
often conceded by Southern statesmen; but il il
] worn not 50 We micht Mell saY 10 those rentlemen