The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-07-03
COMMUNICATIONS.
DEFERisED DEBATE.
FRIDAY, JUNE 2s. 1850.

ment Of territorial governments for Utah and New Mexi
co. and making proposals 10 Texas for the settlement
OF her northern and western boundaries, and the pending
question beng upon the substitute offered some days
ago by Mr. SouLE-
Mr., SOULE said Mr. President, rose on yesterday
ask the floor. after the distinguished senator from
Massachusetts [Mr WEssrrRl had resumed his seat
with view 10 answer al once, and the spur OF the
moment. the arguments he had urged in reply to the
speech which had delivered two days before But the
extreme adrotness OF my friend from Mississippi Mr.
FooIE 70 catch the eye aud The ear Of the Chair en-
abed him to take the chance for himself, while it
strained me 10 withhold until now what brief remarksJ
had intended for the OCCASION
The senator from Massachusetts. upon entering into
The debate, stated 80 fully and distinctly the propo-
sons which had asseited that iiet assured he would
review them one by ONE, and show in what each and all
had failed 70 convince him He must surely have deemed
some OF them unworthy OF any other notice than bare
mention, as he did abstain so scrupulousy from
auding to them N the course Of his terse and pointed
marks Sir, shall aempi To bring them afresh to his
consideration. that may know whether or not he has
determined TO leave them unanswered.
The first proposition which will lay down. in order to
follow the senator in his argument will be to the effect
that whdteuer belongs to The Sovereign by vrtue OF has
soperegnfy passes uh tito The heW sOperegn DheneUer
ihs Sovereignty Changes hands.
Upon that principle did maintain that, by the admission
OF California into the Union sovereign State, the pub
lie domain now within her limits would be transferred
her, unless secured by ordinance oi REIMBURSEMENT
prior to or contempoaneons with her admission; and
brought forth the authority of Vael TO show that the
right OF domain was nseparable from the sovereignty
To histhe honorable senator replies that the sovereign
tied sovereignty, and that the useful domain distinct
from and utterly unconnected with the eminent domain
which is the domain that belongs to and follows the
sovereignty; and the very authority from which quo
Ted is invoked in support oi that position.
Sir the honorable senator seemed TO lind amlss that
should have extracted from Vattel a quotation which
had been brought forward on this floor some twenty
years ago by an eminent statesman from Indiana, and
hat should have used II in the very words OF that
statesman, as il the same authority from the same book
undergo process OF variation as 1t passed through
different hands and, with an emphasis somewhat sarcas
e he intmaed that we'll The gentleman TO whom
have just alluded had stopped short in my quotation
and lett out important part OF 1t, which materially
qualified the principle asserted.
Mr.. WEBSTER, Qnterposing) beg the gentemans
PARDON Ii be had heard my remarks distinctly he would
have observed that attributed the stopping in the middle
of the passage to the gentleman whom had read from,
and not The gentleman himself
Mr.. SUULE. OF course but, as had used the same
quotations. and stopped at the place. It was but JUS
nee that should take al least one.haf OF the rebnke
which it met with at the hands OF the distinguished SEN
ator
In connexion with this, have to say, first, that it
would be passing strange it, under such circumstances,
and quoting the very words which had been quoted by
the senator from indiana had introduced language
varying from any unlike that which he him.
sell had used; and, secondly, that II was not uniateh-
ll9nay that lei out ,se end Of the paragraph n from ,
aimed at drawing the attention OF The Senate TO-.
shall presently show that the sequel far from weakening
strength and sppropriatcness What was it | extracted
from Vatie Why, this: "Thu sovereignty is necessa-
ry and inseparably connected with The right OF soil TO
the territory which exercised hat Is II that
the honorable senator would have me add That
sovereign, nation, may possess feis &c within the
limits OF country not subject 10 their Jurisdction-the
very words showing that, the ntendment oil the wr
ter the useful domain generally and OF right belongs to
the sovereign, although II may be separated IRON the
sovereignty Was not admitting the exception when
coniendng that il should be saved by solemn reserya-
ton from passing TO the sovereign My argument
was this The United States have other right TO the
public domain within the Territories ceded to them by
Mexico but that which Mexico herself possessed over
them II was sovereign, and by virtue OF her soy.
ereignty that Mexico held that rights and the United
States under her, can claim no o.heI hey ,nen' pos
ereigniy and, il so, they necessarily dvest themselves
OF from the moment that through their suferance and
sanction passes under the jurisdiction OF new SOW
eeign provided always that is reserved BY act
prior conemporaneous with the nvesuture oil the
sovereign. Now, MIR. President, II is no answer 10
this, that, according TO Vae sovereign may pos
sess lands and other property within sovereignty not
his own. So far my argument admits IT, But The ques-
ton occurs, which has not been answered yet, what
title have you 10 the useful domain over which you
claim 10 Teiain your CONTROL ii be not the treaty. Look
al il, and point out 10 me, you can, where transfers
TO you, noniine the useful donanl You cannot claim
il under its provisions, except through the sovereignty
which il transfers you, and through the enlargement OF
boundaries over which IL allows you 10 extend your ju
rsdictcn and il 30. will you not dlyes yourselves OF
that DOMAIN when, in the you will transfer
your sovereignty TO the new State Precisely so
by virtue OF the principle, and exactly through the
implication, unless you reserve IN the manner
provided Tor in the substitute before the Senate.
The distinguished senator, whilst so punclIIous on the
point OF full quotations. has Iaen himself into The bunder
or which he Witty child the statesman through whose
track he pursuing and has omitted most impor.
ani remark, which Vatel adds to the words which he
himself quoted from his book. II s this:
That ia such tbs prince or tue nation, holding
properly tsIritoy Of another pfinee o. anoiler NJ
tion, holds t as by lite Of private ownership
ask, then, If such be the exception how can be
made apply the United States. holding lands they
10 within the borders OF individual State! They
hold them exempt ffom axai0n-an exemption which, VI
carried out TO s extreme consequences, would take away
iIom the State the na resource through which she can
sustain herself aud support her government
II the unted States can possess lands TO any extent
within the limits o State they may-and, with The vast
means they possess, would not be surprised n they
were 10 realize some day or other monsttous con-
ency-toseess them all they may az said before
cover ,hem with a federal enanty and by perleilang
snch state OF things actually destroy ali Independence
IN the State aud reduce her 10 condon of perfect vas
saage.
What il 10 become OF her sovereignty, il the federal
government lease the lands send lhs agents to col
lect the rents and forever remain exonerated lrom all
taxation. &c.i
Is such condition oi State IN harmony with the
republican spirit OF institutions Is u constitutional
Isl necessary Tor any purpose OF government or 10 carry
any OF lis powers! IL is not And II such ~ stem
takes loot and is submitted to, the Independence OF the
States is gone and that clause in the Constitution annul-
led which the right OF the United states 70 possess
lands within the limits oi State 70 fofs, magazines
arsenas dock afds, and other needlul buildings Nor
IL maintain, necessary for any purpose o he govern
Massachusetts "ihey are the property OF The United
Staies and remain such until disposed OF by them Iha
precisely what contend i0s the Territories are yours,
aud the public domain within them il your property but