The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-05

Now, SIR, Il will compare notes with the honorable
and the free soil doctrine upon This subject lie dssrss
put in provision that the legislature shall not legis
late in respect TO slavery The law OF Mexico prohibited
laws Of nations That prohibition continues in force
He proposes TO give them provision that shall continue
that in force. and deprive the people themselves OF the
power OF repeating IT, That is The very given by
the honorable senator IRON Wisconsin MI. WALKERl
for desiring TO keep that provision in That is the point
i IT,. was voted no the % bill of hs Committee q IItse
the senator from Vermont Mr. PHELPs,l giving the cast.
ing vote 10 get i in because il was prohibition OF
slavery forever wish 10 strike il out because do not
wish perpetuate any institution upon people
their will wish to leave them free 10 regulate their
own institutions ~ their own way, without either pro-
hbiiing establishing any institution whatever. made
but those remarks, which thought were courteous.
did not refer 10 the senator from Alabama in The Iemoest
degree had made speech In favor OF doctrine that
and did not expect that honorable senator, either
show lrrltability or use cpthets--snbsntutng that
was made calmly, and advanced in good temper had
made uncourteous remarks. a
And now amply repeat lhatI would rather have the
doctrine that the democratic party stood upon in the eec
lion of IS4S and net sulnfy the whole democratic party
by pursuing different i is now clear that the
object is to stultify the democratic party OF ods The
time. The senator from Mississippi Mr.. DAys] said
that he then opposed 10 it--hat he had fears and
misgvipgs. The senator from Alabama says that be,
too. against that doctrine then. Senator after sena
tor begins TO denounce t But Is the senator
iron Michigan and his trends, who smtten down
consequence OF their being in favor OF that doctrine
then, 10 be smitten down again. and 10 be required 10
come up and vote for the very measure that s in
tended TO sutfy and disgrace him. the leader OF the
democratic party That the question; and il we are
to meet it, lei meet il like men. The senator IRON
Kentucky manly enough to say that ne was opposed
to it, He saw that this provision would stnhiy our
party; and he manly enough TO that he thought
It wrong 10 put it in this bill. now desire 10 see
my democratic friends do The same thing We can then
stand where have stood upon this question.
Mr.. WEBSTER. | was not aware, MIR. President,
that there anything in this question that could run
far into the history of the interests and feelings OF
party, past present, come, to be supposed
by the senator from Illinois. think that the amendment
proposed BY the honorable senator from Mississpps
| OF very lutte moment and effect any way doubt
whether il has any influence upon the Just construction
of the bill But understand the object OF gentlemen
who take part in this dscusson--oi many OF them at
least oeject easily reached by another form and
manner. have on the surface OF this question
and supposed everything belonging 10 il was upon the
but disposition to prevent the terrific
rial governments from deciding upon the question OF The
permanent establishment The permanent exclusion oil
slavery n the Territory hereafter TO be governed By
the bill II there is anything deeper IN II than that
have not faihomed the meaning Now, sir. il that be
the object, that object be reached in very plain
manner. | saw an amendment the other day in the
hands of the honorable member from Indiana Mr..
WHrcoMB,l which thought was calculated to acco9S
pish tnai object in words II is the same as has
been indicated to-day by the honorable member from
Alabama. The bill now reads. that the territorial legis
aure shall have no authority TO pass any law respecting
become necessary pass laws respecting slavery, II sa
very shall have existed Now, sir. suppose the amend.
poeT p of = = II, oa wo aed
to say that the territorial legislatures shall have no au.
thoriy pass any law for establishing excluding sa
very the Territories 1t appears to me that that Is the
upshot OF the matter; and suppose that that the
proper object take that the meaning OF the whole
matter that this question shall be left to the people OF
the State, after II becomes sovereignty by admission
into the Union of the original States and upon
the footing tmay then have the question to de.
eide for itself take il to be clear that Il = municipal
question for the decision of the people in their State
pacy. There might be propnety-there certainly can
be no impropnety-in excluding the exercise OF any
excluding slavery. must say. out of consistency with
my own opinion, that look upon the whole matter as
not OF the slightest practical utility In the present case,
have any effect whatever upon the actual state o things
that may arrive in New Mexico. The proposition in
that shape is unoblechonable
Mr. DAVIS, of Mississippi, Tin his seat) II in that
VIZ WEBSTER Allow me to say one word more
The people OF the Territory have right to do every
ceve Of that understand something, hope, about the
rights OF man, as they exist, before government and
without government, before the social state and before
the political But, when speak OF the rights OF per
and the rights Of people who in social and in
political sate who are under the dominion and power
of government, suppose we must mean their rights
they exist, especially their social and political
rights, they exist in a certain state of things. will
not 90 into general reasoning about H. ! shall not
gan given TO sometime ago. We have always gone
upon the ground that territorial government is IN
saie OF puplageof paronage-of protection. The ter
ntoria legislature has its constitution BY Congress- has
no power given TO her except from Congress, and
must within the limits OF that power. No idea has
been entertained among that the people in Territory
were a sovereignty, or that their government was
sovereignty They possess Of the rights ncdent TO
sovereignty 1t is peculiar satea state Of inchoate
sovereignty, IL you choose TO call it, Now, II we
settle this question upon this ground, think shall
lind difficulty in disposing Of II is duty TO pro-
vide for them government TO keep the peace 10 secure
their properly and assign them subordinate legsa
tive authorityo assign 10 them subordinate judicial
authority and TO that the protection OF Their persons
and the security OF their property are all Regularly pro-
yided for and 10 maintain them IN that state OF things
until thew shall become OF sufficient importance TO be adj
med into the Union a State government on the same
footing as one OF the original States. Now. IL seems TO
me that that duty, and anything that tends TO the
performance OF thai duty shall most heartily concur in
viii not now 20 into he discussion about the right OF
the people in Territory TO do than they per
mted do by the constitution that Congress has estsb
| lished over them
| Mr. HALE. Mr President, do not feel disposed for
one al this moment to concede, by implication, that
the question nov before the Senate and before the
ry Is one OF practical Indifference Wehave grown from
10 States, and the history OF the new States that
have been added the Union the formation Of the
constitution OF the United States will show this impor-
ant fact that matter what IL the latitude, what the
longitude OF any territorial government that has been
ganized by virtue OF the authority Of Congress- in every
solitary instance in which slavery not expressly
prohibited by act Of Congress- slavery has gone and ex
tended itself to the present dav