Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1850-02-21

:
the five or six embraced in these resolutions
would of itself furnish theme for length.
ened speech and | am, therefore, reduced
to the necessity, think, at least in this
stage of the discussion, of limiting myself
rather to the expression of opinions than to
going to any great length into the discus
sion of all these various topics. Now, sir,
with respect to the opinion here asserted,
that slavery does not eXest III the Terrific
rles, coded to the United States by Mexico,
| can Only relor, sir, to the fact of the pas
sage of law by the supreme government
of Mexico abolishing it, think, III the year
1924, and the subsequent passage of a leg
islative body of Mexico-I forget in what
yearly which they propose-what, it is
true, they never yet carried into full feet
"a compensation to the owlcrs of slaves
for the property of which they were dcpriy-
ed by the act of abolition. can only re-
fer to the acquesence Of Mexico to the ab-
clifton of slavery. from the time of its cX-
tinction down to the time of the treaty by
which we acquired those countries. All
Mexico, so far rs know, acquiesced in the
non-cxistencc OF slavery. Gentlemen, am
aware, talk about the irregularity Of the
acts BY which slavery was abolished but
does II become US, a foreign power, TO look
into the modes by which an act was accom-
pIished by 4 foreign power, when she her
self Is satisfied with what is done, and when
she, too, Is exclusively the Judge whether
the object, then local, municipal in Mexico,
has or has not been abolished in coaiormi-
Is with her fundamental law ! Why, sir,
Mexico, upon tins subject, showed to The
last moment her anxiety. In the docu-
meuis which were laid before the couniry
upon the subject OF tie negotiation Of the
treaty by Mr.. FIRST, YOU Will find this pas
save contained in one OF his dispatches
" Among the poipls which came under
discussion was the exclusion of slavery from
all territory which shodld piss from Mexi-
CO. la the course of their remarks on the
subject, was told that If it were proposed
to the people of the United States to part
with portion Of their territory, in order
that the nqni-it.on should be therein esiab-
lshed, the proposal could not excite strong
er feelings o! adherence than those awaken
ed IN Mexico b ythe prospect ofthe introduce
ton of slavery IN any territory parted WIKI
by her. Oar conversation en- this topic was
perfectly frank, and no less friendly, aud
the more effective upon their minds, as
was enabled to say, with perfect security,
that although their impressions respecting
the practical fact Of slavery, as 1t existed
IN tie United States, were, hid.no doubt,
entirely erroneous, yet there was probably
i hot, II
aud sentiments on slavery, considered in it.
sell, and those which they entertained /
concluded by assuring them that the bare
mention of the subject IN any treaty 10
which the Unlted States were party was
an absolute impossiblity; that no President
OF the United States would dare to present
any such treaty to the Senate and that If
ii were IL ,hc.g power to offer mc the whole
territory described in our project, Increased
tenlcid IN value, and, in addition to that,
covered foot thick all o5er with pure gold,
upon the sinyie condition that slavery should
be excluded thereirom, | could not enter
tam the OFF, for moment, nor thIak even
of communicating it to Washington. The
matter ended IN their being fully satisfied
that this topic was one not to be touched,
and it was dropped, WITH good feeling on
both sides"
Thus you fad that, in the very act Of ne
COLLATION. by winch the treaty was conciu-
ded. which ceded TO us the Country Hques-
ton, the diplomatic representatives. oi the
Mexican Republic urged the adherence
with which Mexico would view the intro
duciion of slavery into any portion OF the
territory winch she was ab.u to ccIe 10 the
United States But prohibition Of lis III
PRODUCTION was not inserted, IN consequence
OF The frm ground taken by Mr.. Trist, and
his declaration that II was an utter lHipuSsi-
biliIy even 10 mention the subject. take
it, thea, for granted, sir-aYaIllng myself
OF the benefit of the discussions which took
place upon this topic at Il former session,
which think have left the whole country
under the impression Of the no.l-cXlsience
of slavery in the ceded rerr.tories--i take
it for granted that what have sad will sat
lsy the Senate of that first truth-that
slavery does not exist there by law, unless
slavery was carried there the moment the
treaty was ratified by the two parties of the
treaty, under the operation OF the constitu-
ton of the United States.
Now, sir, really, | must say that the idea
that 60 Instant, upon the contamination OF
the treaty, the constitution Of the United
States spread itself over the acquired coun-
try and carried along with it the institution
of slavery, is SO irreconcilable with any
comprehension or any reason which | pos
scss, that | hardly know how to meet it
Why, sir, these United States consist of
thirty states In fifteen of them, there was
slavery in fifteen, slavery did not exist
How can it be argued that the fifteen slave
States, by the operation of the constitution
of the United States, carried into the coded
country their institution OF slavery, amy
more than it can be argued upon the other
side, that by the operation OF the same COR
sttution, the fifteen free States carried into
the coded Territories the principle OF free
dom, which they, from policy, have chosen
to adopt within their limits Let me sup
pose case, sir. Let me imagine that Mex
leo had never abolished slavery there at all.
Let me suppose that it was existing there,
by virtue OF law, from the shores OF the Pa
cllic to those of North Mexico, at the mo-
ment of the cession of those countries to
us by the treaty in question. W lth what