The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-05-23

be imposed upon the property Of the oni'ed
| States, &c.
Mr.. Douglas. Is it in order to ask for divi'
sion Of the question
The Presiding officer. Ii is not
Mr.. Davis of Mississippi Mr.. President,
will briefly state TO the Senate my object In NOV
| ing this amendment IL il 10 test the sense Oh the
| Senate upon a single questionable right TO the
service of man whether the property in slaves,
! as they exist in the slaveholding States OF the
| Union shall receive the same protection shall
| receive the same countensnce in the Senate, and
elsewhere in the Government of the United
States, as other property. The language OF the
bill as it stands, would seem to exclude property
growing out of the institution of African slavery
from that protection of the Territorial Legisla-
ture which is to be accorded to all other species
of property. As propose to amend 1t, 1t will re-
strict the Territorial Legislature from invading
| the right of the inhabitants of the slavehodiDg
States, guaranteed tbem-their rights as they
! hold them under the Constitution-leaying the
question to be decided according TO the cardinal
principle of the Democratic party, when the peo-
pie composing the Territory come to form state
for themselves Ii will leave them all the powers
necessary not only for the preservation OF their
property, but for preserving the peace OF the Ter
ritory-those powers essentially necessary to pre-
vent disorder, and which would be absolutely
necessary with such property as that to secure 1t
benefcially to the use of the owner. With this
brief explanation, | submit the amendment.
Three distinct bills are recommended by the
Committee-one, for the prohibition of the slave
trade in the District of Columbia, another, for the
reclamation Of fugitives from service or labor
another, for the admission of California, the or
ganixation Of Territorial Governments without
| the Proviso for New Mexico and Utah, and the
purchase of the claim of Texas to New Mexico
| The last is the Omnibus bill, so-called: Mr. Clay
wishes it to be understood as Compromise be-
tween North and South, or, rather, between the
Mons layeholding and the Slaveholding Interests.
Let us not be deceived by words. Three distinct
measures are proposed in this Omnibus bill
First, the admission of California State.
What concession are shareholders to make on this
point? They have always strenuously asserted
the right of the People of a Territory, on organ
izing the form of State Constitution, to deter
mine whether slavery shall be tolerated or pro-
hibted among them The Californians have ex-
ercised this right freely, without interference in
forbidding slavery Compliance with their ap-
plcation for admission as State, decides no issue
between the North and South-is no victory of
e,ro Toffief,, no defeat Of the iatecr Tne South
yields no pretensions the North secures no right
I which has ever been contested. In relation TO
the admission of California as State, there is no
compromise.
But, there are two questions on which the
Slsveholding and Non.Saveholdng Interests
have been arrayed in distinct, absolute opposi-
| tn Inf nm nj
slavery in the Territories; the other, to the claim
of Texas to New Mexico The shareholders
have constantly insisted that Congress should es-
tablish Government for the Territories, without
prohibiting slavery by positive act and that the
claim of Texas should be recognised The non
shareholders have constantly insisted on positive
prohibition by Congress of Territorial slavery,
and the non-recognition of the claim of Texas.
Mr. Clay steps in as arbitrator, to settle the two
points in dispute, by compromise And what do
he and his Committee, in their equal regards for
the two parties propose? To take everything
from one, to give everything to the other-to
recognise the demands of one, to repudiate those
of the other-to decide on both points in favor of
the Shareholders against the non shareholders.
For, the two distinct measures they propose, pro-
vide, first for the establishment of Territorial
Governments without the Proviso, precisely what
Shareholders have demanded and non-slaveholders
resisted and for paying Texas a vast amount of
money for her claim to New Mexico, q claim
which the shareholders have asserted to be valid,
ona non slaveholders, to be fraudulent and
groundless
And this Omnibus BILL one part Of which rec
ognises rights about which there has been no dis
putc, the other portions of which completely de
eide two great questions in controversy between
shareholders and non-saveholders, against the de
mands of the latter in favor of those of the for
mer, is styled a compromise,
Even the editor of the Mem York TriJome seems
hslfinclined to accept the BILL because he magine
that il will secure New Mexico from the grasp o
Texas, and give her chance for Freedom. A
precious chance, truly! Suppose the bill passed
New Mexico is contiguous with slavehoding ter
ritory and will be constantly exposed to slave
holding immigration. Can she prevent it2 No
Her Territorial Legislature is to be tied hanC
and foot The bill says that it shall pass no Law
ain respect to African slavery" The People
may see slaves brought into their Territory, KEEP
subject under the iron rule Of their masters
worked in the mines, and yet they will be power
ess--their Legislature can pass no law to pro
hibit the introduction of slaves-none, to release
them from the power Of their masters lt may bt
said that the courts will hear demand for Free
dom under the old Mexican laws. But, suppose
the indges should be from the Southern States
and agree in opinion with the Southern Sena
tors, that the Constitution of the United States
abrogates all laws in the new Territories con
aicting with the right of property in slaves
Or, suppose, in common with the whole South
they should assume the validity of the Texar
claim to New Mexico, and predicate their deci
sion on the 39th section of the Omnibus bill, which
provides rs follows:
"The United States cede to the State of Texas
all right, claim and title which they have to any
territory lying south of the line aforesaid :
: above 80 north latitude "and the said State
of Texas cedes to the United States any right
claim. or title, which it has to any territory lyinl
north of the said line"
They would argue that the Territory, before
its cession by Texas, belonged to that State, was
therefore, slave territory, and that the rights o.
property, existing antecedently therein, under
the sovereignty of Texas, were not affected by
the mere act of cession. This, in fact is th'
ground already taken by Southern Senators
And is it in this way, New Mexico is to be saved
from the curse Of slavery?
But we would call particular attention to thu
beautiful illustration the bill affords Of the doc
trine of Nom Intervention, rs explained by its au
thor, General Casss This gentleman in the be
ginning of the session made a labored argument
to show that Congress had no power at all under