Washington telegraph., 1850-03-06

eooiI VI Vic resolutions, put would detain
the Senate for a while in the examination
OF the truths set forth in those resolutions.
AS to the first, that slavery does not exist
IN an! of the Territories acquired by
Mexico, he would refer to the act of 024
by the supreme government of Mexico.
Whereby slavery was abolished in that
nation, and the general acquiesence of all
the States OF Mexico i'll that abolition of
slavery, down to the time of the treaty
ceding those Territories to the United
States. This act of the government of
Mexlcowas said to have been irregular,
and not binding; but it was not our prov
lnce-a foreign power-to inquire into
the validity of the municipal acts of any
government, particularly when the peo-
pie OF Mexico had acquiesced in it.
Mr. =. also read an extract from the
correspondence of MIR. Trist with the gov
ernment on this point The discussions
on formeroccasion when this territory
was first ceded, had left the general inn
preston thatslavery was not in existence
in Mexico or hose territories prior to their
cession to the United States. Nor could
he account for its existence there now,
unless at the mement the treaty of cession
was concluded the constitution was ex-
tended over every part of the territory
and took slavery With it,
Such doctrine was wholly irreconcilable
with his views and feelings. There were
at the time of that tieaty fifteen free ahd
fifteen slave States in the Union; the in.
stitu:ions Of both were recognized by the
Constitution, Ill extending over these ter
ritories, could carry the principle of sla-
very, and could not carry the principles
of freedom established in one half of the
Union? BY the laws of Mexico, there
was no slavery in these territories at the
time of cession; and as no action had
been taken to Introduce it there, he
thought he had sufficient reason for say
ing it did not exis: there now.
The question of slavery was divisibIe
into two branches: slavery i'll the States
and slavery without the States Con-
gress have no powers over slavery in the
States, except in the three particulars
mentioned in the Constitution. That is,
the power to regulate representation, the
power to levy tax, and the powers rela-
two to fugitive alavos. Beyond this,
Congress had no power over slavery in
the States.
If Congress were called upon to over
turn the institution Of slavery in the
States, and such a measure was seriously
thought of, then his voice would be for
war Then a case would be presented
where it would be justifiable in the sight
of God and of nations, to resist the oppres-
sion. They would then be acting in self
defence; and the slave States would then
be justifable in resisting the act by every
means within their power; and, in a civil
war in such case, they would have the
sympathies and support OF every man
who loved justice and right
France had engaged in war to pro-
pogale the rights OF man, and her fate
was well known. If we should engage
in civil war about the introduction of
slavery INTO territories where it does not
exist. what a spectacle would be present
to propagate the rights of man. but war
to propagate wrongs of man. Our British
ancestors were blamed, and Justly, for in
Producing into our midst this institution;
and he, for one, would never vote for its
any where, where the people
did not desire it.
The question of slavery without the
limits of the States was debatable one.
Slavery within the States was undebata-
BILE. On the question of slavery without
the States there was room for difference
of opinion, but not for such difference
of opinion as would lead to the breaking
up of this Government.
He differed widely from his friend from
Michigan (Mr. Cass) as to the binding
of decisions of the Supreme
Court, and elementary writers Oh the
Constitution. He regarded, that when
question was once decided
by competent authority, it was settled.
Otherwise there was nothing settled under
the Constitution, but all was still un-
settled.
He put it to gentlemen to say if there
was not an actual existing power some
where to introduce or exclude slavery
from the Territories. If so. where was
the power? Before the treaty with Mex
leo that power was vested in Mexico. she
having then the territory and the sover-
eighty over it. Mexico parted with the
territory and the sovereignty to the United
States, and now the United States have
all the powers and sovereignty possessed
by Mexico before the treaty. The power
does or does not exist. And, if it exists,
the United States have all the powers
possessed by Mexico, under the limita-
tions of the Constitution.
There was no power given to Congress
in express terms by the Constitution over
the subject of slavery, but there was no
power given in express terms over an IN
finite Variety of other subjects which
were acted upon every day. 1t was an