The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-20


Sir TO whatever other criticisms this protest may be sub
iected il is certainly not TO be subjected that OF having
said ANYTHING that untrue unfair in relation To the
efforts made 10 reduce the limits Of California Every
proposition which offered failed, and that is all which
the protest asserts. What might have been done we
know not nor had we the Of knowing il, did
we venture any assertion in relation 10 it
Now, air IN relation 10 the consuIionalIy of admit
ting California, there is diversity OF opinion. There
are gentlemen who believe that il Unconstitutional
10 admit al all under The circumstances There are
Others that draw distinction, and believe that II you had
divided H. you might have consiluiionaly admitted
part because you thus saved the rights OF the South and
defeated the object Of excluding her, II you give her
fair and equal participation the soil There is third
objection 10 spreading upon The journal The gentleman
from Maryland not responsible for he contents OF The
paper. unless they dssespeetlui admit that this
inquiry gemane the question II il be dsIespectful,
have right 10 spread the protest upon We record.
But maintain and believe thal here nothing IN that
here: certain am that there is nothing which not
so Intended There is difference OF opinion admit as
10 the class who think that while the abstract there
may have been constitutional authority to admit Cali
forna State yet that il improper and unconsti-
tuonai in Its consequences. inasmuch il sanctions
system oil measures IN California which calculated
to defeat the constitutional rights of the South This
protest ~ 80 drawn, II me, contradict the
opinions Of neither OF these three classes of persons 1t
leaves this question OPEN and does not prescribe the par
ucpar views which gentlemen hold 10 depart from
this measure But as said before, what have the
tents OF that paper TO do with the expedency OF esiab
fishing such precedent Upon that matter have said
all that ought to say and do not wish TO pToong this
debale desire the question TO be settled form
or other today and should not have said as much as
have, the opinions and conclusions which have been
drawn from that paper had not been such my opn
ion. were not iustifable.
his remarks by saying that fair-minded could
come me- e n SDpsSsiGn that bat this papes
you were fair minded man.
MIR. PRATT. The senator says he knew was fair.
minded man. am not sure that he does not say it
rather from courtesy than otherwise. But he did say
that IN his opinion, had looked upon this paper with
prejudice and that from the beginning had designed
pressed Now. Mr. President, this design attributed 10
me Is very contrary to the truth for desired TO stand
ready to Crafty those gentlemen in overseeing, posi-
bic, all pIecedents and voting for the reception of the
paper. II could do after examination OF its con-
tents
There two observations of the senator from Vir-
GINA which wish very briefly to notice. He says that
the paper does not recommend resistance and he has
swered my argument il had commended that it did
recommend resistance Now, my argument is that the
paper sets forth state OF facts have occurred the
history OF the Legislation OF the country which renders
resistance necessary to save the honor OF every southern
State 1t does not IN many terms, say that the South
ought TO resist It does not, IN terms, say that they IN
tend to resist but states that this bill which has passed
unconstitutional, and has deprived the South of her
constitutional rights Now the senator did not refer at
all to the paragraph which read, which this:
for "a bill passed such crcum stances
woud be 70 agree to principle which exclude forever
hereafter, as II does now, the States which represent
from all enjoyment Of the common territory Of the Union
principle which destroys the equal rights of their
equal dignity OF those whom they represent and
citizens IN the eye OF the law and their equal tle to the
protection OF the government and the constitution.
Thus the s nth as having been deprived
by these acts OF the government OF the United States OF
the rights which are here enumerated. Now say that
il my honorable friends believe this they have perfect
right and that ii is their duty known to the
country that such is the existing state of facts. Mr.
Preslden the people OF this country have been sleeping
their minds know the with the people of nv
own S,ate-that this great Union be dissolved
Therefore am glad that the opinion OF these honorable
senators, that the passage OF this bill has occaioned
state OF things in reference TO the southern States which
here enumerated dangerous TO The Union, has gone
before the people of the country. glad that the
people OF Maryland and OF every southern State in the
Union, may what is the deliberate judgment OF the
representatives OF those ten savehodng States OF
Union, IN regard to the obligations of the South growing
out Of what has pired here in legislation Now
have not complained of this action the part of that
seaator or those who have Joined with him in offering
this protest What do say this Inasmuch as these
sentiments have gone TO every OF this country
and Is DOW known ihreug bout the North, South East
and West that the question is al this moment pending in
the Senate whether we will spread this protest upon the
recorda OF the Senate, Is important that should
vote 10 have il received and recorded upon the Journal OF
this body.
With notice of one other observation OF the honora.
BILE senator, shall close When replying to my argu-
ment that in this protest was contained ssseveIaton
that this admission Of California was unconstitutional
be said there difference OF opinion among
IN reference TO the constutonay Of this law, and that
this paper did not assert that California might not be ad
cannot comprehend that the limits OF territory at all
add to or detact from the consutionay of the law by
which that territory is to be admitted Whether the adj
misson OF California State of this Union is consti-
tuonal or mol, depend upon The OF the
ntory embraced within the limits OF the State
Mr.. HUN TER Will the senator allow to explain,
for do not wish to speak again II is the opinion OF
q the South, that IS the constitutional right of the South
either TO be enabled TO have social position, by beng
permitted TO enjoy all the territory, else TO have far
division between the savehoding and veholdng
States Either condition would satisfy the claims of the
South. That il the objection OF and that opinion
- not contradic,ed remarked before in that protest.
for object avoid those controveried points
MIR, PRATT. having the loor waived any further
remarks
Mr.. DAVIS, OF Mississippi Mr. President those who
have protested against the action of this body
forth in the paper before the Senate certainly
very much indebted to their opponents for the importance
they have given TO that paper might originally have
doubted whether so few raising their voice against
great measure would have attracted public attention
proceeding it has been entirely removed BY the bitter
opposition that has been made TO it. | sure that
the country will have their attention drawn TO it; and il
snail produce those exciting effects which have
attributed TO IT, will be, of the paper itself
but because OF the relentless opposition which made BY
the majority Of this body to its reception being an adj
otti0na manifestation OF disregard for the opinions and
feeliues OF the minority which will increase If anything
eanv the estimated importance OF the subject TO which
tAsRroiast relates Had l. Tor one. not believed the
pg0bab consequences OF action, and, in this con
naxion the importance Of that subject TO be great be-
yund any legislative act which has preceded il, should
hevs hsstasd long before conserving to the presentation
Of protest., Tor The purpose OF having entered upon
the journal Of the Senate. II was because believed