The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-28
CONGRESSIONAL.
srEEcH OF mR. DAYTON,


%, 1850
The Senate having under consideration the resolutions
Of compromise submitted by Mr. BELL together with ths
motion OF Mr FoorE TO refer them to a committee o
Mr.. DAYTON said:
MIR. PRrsIDESr: The war with Mexico has brought
with il much territory and much trouble. This result
early foreseen Il was not only early foreseen, but j
was strongly deprecated. We now have national es
tate beyond our national wants or means OF enjoyment
and yet not less the subject OF contention among the
heirs Some gentlemen on this side OF the chamber, in
anticipation OF the difficulties which now surround US,
never assentcd to the treaty by which this territory
acquired they preferred the hazard OF continuance Of
the with Mexico rather than peace which should
bring territory along with It. There few upon this
side Of the chamber and Of the number, who pre-
fered alternative, peace upon the terms then offered
rather than continuance OF the war. with the chances
OF larger amount of territory further South at its close
lido not now. Mr. President, regret my action upon that
subject ;itis easy to appreciate difficulties which around
us and upon us but it is hard to say what these difficult
ties would have been, had that been continued, by
defeating the treaty and as probable consequence the
whg party been defeated at the ensuing election hesi-
tate believe that the conclusion Of that war; under
the auspices of democratic. administration would have
brought with il additional amount OF territory further
South, and better appropriated to slave labor twond
have increased rather than diminished the difficulties
which now surround US But, Mr. President, the acqui
siton Of this territory was emphatcay the act the
policy Of the South This matter either for good or for
evil, has been forced upon the North. not only against
will but against remonsance and fears, Otmes
expressed this chamber But the territory here; and
the next step in the progress Of this matter to the dis
position which to made of it That the citizens Of the
no man can dispute But that very equality q right
pes the idea that the minority interest shall have an
absolute control Equality is equily;" buta system
control Of the many is neither equality nor equity.
There controversy, then, regard to The principle
that southern friends have with US, politically and
personally equal rights in the Teroes but they are no
more than equal II is the application Of this principle
of equality which makes the issue between them and
The first difficulty grows out OF California That country
has accomplished what at the last session, did not sup
pose could be accomplished within brief space Her
condition must have been misunderstood msrepresent
ed There have been, it would SEEM but few compare
in The mines and washings Others have met in conven-
ton and formed constitutions which her people have
adopted They have appointed senators and elected rep
y s a. he
the Union. The question then occurs, Why shall not
the request be grantedl California moi at the last
principal objection to her admission then That she is
now State de Jacto no man can dispute But SIR, they
have Incorporated il seems, an anti slavery clause IN
their State constitution This. however, ! understand
distinctly from our friends OF the Souih s to their minds
objection to the admission OF California into the Union.
understand that they stand now, as they ever have,
upon the principle OF non-ntevenon and the fact OF the
Incorporation OF this principle into the California const
ution forms OF itself objection in their minds to the
admission Of the State into the Union That being SO,
narrows very much the ground OF opposition. We get
rid in this way OF those OF excitement which have
pervaded the country from North TO South The matter
thus brought to stand, not upon aqueson OF right or
honor, or power but as mere question oil political expe
diency.
Now, sir what are the objections to the admission OF
California, looked at matter of form and with eye
to exPediency' know these objections have been gone
by Others and what little have 10 say upon them
will be said as briefly as the nature OF the circumstances
will admit
Ii has been said that, by the admission Of California
under the circumstances, the federal government will
knowledge that the people Of that country had right 10
egisate for themsevesthat ii will in fact be aban
donment by this government Of the sovereign power OF
Legislation over the Territories. Not at all sir. The
very fact that California here and asks admission
legislation but through and with the consent
Of our legislation, admits the fact that our power upon
admit her upon such application is not only claim, but
the full upon part OF the power OF legislation
over the country Why. sir. Congress- itself never legis
aies for Territory. II creates territorial government
and constitutes that government its agent Il enacts and
supervise Now. suppose state OF things shall arise
where there is prior act granting territorial legislative
are passed BY lis local legislature and subsequently
cognsed By Congress any doubt thatthese laws
would be bindings Is not the act OF Congress giving an
ascent subsequent binding il given prior Does not
the general rule apply to the recognition Of an agency
either before or after an act done Did not in the
quston Of this very territory recognise this principle
The treaty by which IL acquired was not only nego
iaisd BY Mr. Trst without authority but against aulhor
ty; and yet il was sent here and ratified by We ac
knowledged the act subsequent TO the negotiation and y
rs now the law 0f the lanu Our acuon, IN aunittihB
California. no abandonment OF right OF legislation
But then, again, il is said that California is not State
and the constitution authorizes the admission OF States
only. California sir, is Saiea Stale de faco; 1t ex
ercses the powers oil organized government whether
il shall be State de jurs depends upon the action oil
this government She has within herself all the powers,
all the rights and is charged with all the obligations OF
Staie-not OF Stale independent, but OF State de-
pendant--of State formed with view TO admission
into this Union, and consequently curailed somewhat BY
IFS constitution OF the powers OF sovereignty She
has adopted the only character Of government which was
her power upon principles OF national law She could
adopt territorial form OF government; that is the
creature OF federal legislation. She has within herself
all the elements, rights, and powers OF State. II
tended would be against this government only, and
we surely waive the wrong.
But tr this objection II ii existed at all, is obec
ton which answered by the past action OF the govern
ment Excluding the Of Texas some sixteen States
have been admitted since the formation OF the constu.
tion and eight OF them have been admitted without any
prior consent OF Congress to the formation OF the State
government Il is said, however, that they previously
had territorial legislatures But the powers OF terrific
rial government are limited by the act which creates L.
They can have no authority 10 change the fundamental
character OF the territorial government, and make it into
State Outside OF the powers delegated, they are as
much without power though territorial government
had ever existed No amount q argument can make Inn
palmer can any metaphysical subue'y iary dstn
aush between the Of States admitted at without the
PRIOR consent OF Congess) with or without prior terri
tofial government
bur. again, Il has been said there has been priol
census To this reply, that five il not six States have
been admitted without such prior census that there
no provision ef the constitution. and no provision o.
dresses itse to the Just discretion OF Congress whether
n no,nt - f.cf the popuIaion there ia sufficient to ent