The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-05
MONDAY, JUNE 3. 1850.
I'm cosTINuATIos.1
SEN ATE.

msapprehenson appears to prevail in certain quarters in
regard to IT,
Several senator's when the amendment proposed by me
was originally introduced, exclaimed: "Tha is the Will
mot Provso" It is, sir, such thing. introduced il
for the purpose-and only for the parpose-of meeting
and denying the proposition declared BY tie from
mississippi lMr DAvIsl to be mbodied in the amend
ment which he presented
The bill reported by the committee contains an express
prohibition OF territorial legislation respect to African
slavery. II happens that hardly any Two gentlemen
who have spoken upon the subject OF that prohibition,
have agreed as 10 its imports and il Tor the purpose
supposed OF liking its construction at least of sus-
gestDg, and at the time waantng particular con-
strucIion, that the senator from Mississippi moved his
amendment That amendment has been materially modi-
tied during The discussion AS il slands, il provides
that territorial legislature shall neither introduce nor
exclude slavery, but shall have power for the
protection OF property OF every kind which may be intro
duced into or held in the Territories, confonably the
constitution end laws ot the United States
Mr. President. what does this language meanl Shall
we advance single step towards clear and unam-
bguous declaration OF legislative Intention if we adopt
this amendment Undoubtedly the intent would be clear
enough II all agreed with the from Mississippi that
the lermspropery Of every kind held within or brought
into the Territories conformaby to be constitution and
laws OF the United Staesincude property slaves But.
sir that is not agreed On the contrary, apprehend a
very large proportion Of the present. ii not de-
ded majority of opinion that slaves cannot be intro
duced and held as property with the Territories acquired
from Mexicos under the constitution and existing laws
the Union The amendment of the senator, therefore, is
az liable TO msconstruclion and is OF doubtful import,
the original clause
Of The Senaie to the import OF this amendment For This
purpose do not offer The Wilmot Proyso An honorable
senator Mr. SEWARD al earlier period ol this debate,
during your temporary absence, Mr. President from
the chair, did propose that Provso substitute Tor the
amendment OF the senator from Mississippi. and his
uon declared to be out of order OF course, do not
now undertake introduce again that proposition Its
the proper time, would il my purpose But
do oter amendment TO the amendment OF The senator
from Mlsssslppl which meets and negatives the pfopo-
soD that the right carry slaves into the Territory
and hold and dispose OF them there property covered
secured by the senator's amendment or by the original
clause reported from the committee.
Those senators who think thar under the original pro
of the BILL under this amendment oil the SENATOR
slaves may be introduced into the Territories, persons
held there property and who nothing undesirable
that result will oil course vote against my restrictive
proposition But do how any refuse
vote holds the opinion frequently expressed here
that neither the original clause the amendment OF the
senator from Mississippi, when rightly construed, will
warrant slavery in the Territories who IS unwilling
slavery established there the effect and result OF
legislation here Such vote will only give aggression and
effect The proessed wish and purpose OF such
Ii will not be vote o the prohibition Of territorial slavery
twill be vote that slavery shall not be esiabshedin the
Territories by the bill the amendment, under
sucnon which many senators insist upon the true
one and which there is to fear may be held
to be the true one by the Judiciary as at present con-
sttnied.
wss for the purpose of negaiivng this construction
rather, said al the first, OF excluding the concu
sion OF the leading III ds OF the amendmentthat in
roduced the pending amendment 10 it. II that conca
ought 10 be excluded then the proposition have
submitted ought 10 be adopted II that conclusion ought
not 10 be excluded IL the construction the senator IRON
Mssisslppi puts upon his amendment be the one.
and which senator's desire to have carried out into its
practical effect then my proposition should be rejected.
have offered TO the amendment Of the senator from
mississippi may be clearly understood have nothing
further 10 say.
Mr. DAVIS, OF Mississippi The difference between
the amendment OF the honorable senator from Ohio Mr.
CHAsEl and my own is briefly this: Mine proposes TO
10 The territorial Legislature power 10 protect proper
fxnfa md Axuh ka fFss4n
laws OF the United States The honorable senator from
Ohio, true to his instinct, in with tie proposition
to exclude slaves as that property which may be intro
dnced
The VICE PRESIDENT II is not in order to allude
10 a senator's Instincts. lLaughter.l
MIR. DAVIS. do not think there is any reason in il,
however Then, Mr. President, the difference Is this
stand upon the ground we have always held that we
should be permitted TO enjoy rights under the const
tuition; but do not ask Congress 10 decide what is the
tue aud legal construction OF the constitution stand
upon the doctrine OF the National Convention as was
originally understood; that doctune which prevents Con-
gress IRON intervening TO take from man those rights
which he holds under the constitution.
II has been perverted 10 mean that this government
shall not give It's protection IFS shield TO those rights
Mt President, there Is great dsuocnon between TINS
government intervening TO decide what is property in
rIyenDg TO decide what are constitutional rights, and
coming forward 10 give the protection which every citi
zen has right to clam from any government 10 which
position OF the from Ohio and my own is, that he
calls upon Congress TO intervene against rights which
we may have, not nave, under tDf cOnsututlOn
and TO declare that cerian species of property held
within the States is not property held within the mean
ing OF the constitution and therefore not property 10 be
carried into the Territories ask that the territorial
legislature shall protect property OF every kind, and my
opinion that that species OF property under the const
tuition may 90 into the Territories. do not ask Con-
gress decide whether my opinion as correct not
ask Congress only or the protection OF the right where
the right exists The distinction is very broad one,
and, in all have proposed have met il luy-pointed
ly. has covered entirely, in every stage OF modhea-
uon, the amendment which has received my approba-
ton
A word now 10 the senator from Illinois, [Mr DouG-
LAs,l rather II Is TO hIs argument that address my
self The difference between that and myself
consists in the power OF the people. The senator says
the people OF the Territory have a right 10 decide what
their institutions shall be. Wheni by what authority
how many OF them Then, il comes into the
Territory and declares the laws in all coming time, there
is unanimous opinion 10 what that fundamental law
shall be and all the citizens OF the United States. JOINT
owners that Territory, must give way because
with greater unanimy than could be obtained between
two chooses exclude them all. That ~ the doctrine
claim that people having sovereignty c-er the Tern
tories have the power 10 decide what those institutions
shall be- That s the democratic doctrine. as have al
ways understood it, and in our government, under our
combination, the people OF the Territory acquire that
right whenever the United States, any sovereignty,
gives Them the power 10 become State in this Union,
and without having the night before, conceive The
difference then, between the senator and myself IS The
point at which the people do and may assert that
rght-no the inhabitants o the Territory but the peo-
pie az a political body--a people organized having the
right OF exercising sovereignty over the Territories They
NAV establish the fundamental law OF the land. Then
The senator states his position in the presidential canvass