The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-04-16

from htutuCky 10 US
which mark out general plan for the settlement OF all
questions growing out of the subject OF slavery am
afraid, sir that the plan will hardly prove comprehensive
who say that other questions and other difficulties
will mol srse fron this prolific source OF embarrassment
and trouble?
lates to the admission OF California Is not now mat
ter of dispute whether California shall shall not 6e ad-
miited into the Union That question is settled No one
doubts that California is 10 in with the boundaries
which she claims and with the constitution she has adopt
ed. concur cordially in this decision. AS western
man. should have preferred the erection Of two States
rather than out OF the territory acquired from Mexico
on the Pacfic and wish also, in common with many OF
the intelligent citizens OF California, that her east
ezra Nevada Under existing circumstances, however. ]
desire TO California she s without restric
ton and without delay.
But it s proposed to connect the admission Of Calfor
MIA with the general settlement OF the slavery question
is proposed, aso since the recent report OF bill for
her admission and Of bill providing territorial govern
Territories, give this territorial bill precedence
the California bill am opposed, sir TO both these prop
ostons. expect no good result in the present state OF
the country, from the appointment OF such committee
to devise general plan OF settlement in which the adj
mission of California shall be included. The appoint
ment of such an omnibus committee would excite ALARM
distrns Indignation It would not, in my judgment, in
spre confidence or command respect The task assigned
to would be an impossible work. Membership OF il
would be an unenvabe distinction. Any adjustment
that it could devise would be more likely compromise
the compromisers titan to restore tranquility to the coan
try hope that the motion for the appointment Of this
committee may not be pressed. have observed, indeed
with pleasure some indications that will pursued
BUTT will be insisted that the territorial bill for Utah and
New Mexico shall have precedence Of the California ad
mission bill That sir, ustment in another form
The design of is papable enough i is expected that
il will be easier carry the territorial bill, without any
restriction to slavery before than after the admission
Of California lido not know how this may be, but for
will not consent to change the order in which the
bills reported by the committee The country will
gard and, my judgments will justly regard any change
rial BILL as concession the demand for the extension
Of slavery free territories No such concession
ever receive the sanction aI,c Of my vote.
Mr.. FOOTE Will the senator bear with me for mo-
ments
Mr. CHASE With pleasure.
MIR. FOOiE. | did not myself hear remark which
fell from him time since but understand that he is
under the impression that do not intend pressing the
motion have made for the appointment of committee
wh he aGssa nG ss we'll
embrace the opportunity to say, and wish it to be heard
by all the senators present. or at least by those who are
favorable the measure that had hoped that this day
the motion would have been taken up and acted on.
am still in hopes that, after get through this discus
sion, may be acted on if not to-day at the earliest pos
sible period. deem it my Duty my most solemn duty
TO press the motion most earnestly.
Mr.. CHASE am sorry TO find, Mr.. President, that
have been under msapprehension as to the senator's
intention do not believe that it will be esteemed, in
future times credabe distinction to have been, IN the
year OF grace 1850, member OF any committee, by
whose intervention, or by whose nonineryenton free
territory subjected TO the blight OF slavery and un
less the committee is designed TO promote this object,
see no reason why its appointment should be pressed.
from Kentucky relate the adjustment of the Texan
boundary and the assumption by the United States OF the
Texan debt.
Ii seems 10 me, sir that both these quotations have
been brought premaiurey into this discussion. see
good for pressing them al this time upon the
siderauon OF the Senate. Texas is here Her senators
branch Of the national legislature She is OF the
United States 1t is too late to question the constitution
ality OF her admission. And we might well leave all
questions connected with the erection OF States with
10 her limits, the liability of the United States for her
debts and the determination OF her western and north
western boundary. TO be disposed OF when they arise
Not OF them Is important now, except that which
relates the boundary between Texas and New Mexico
and that should be determined IN bill Tor the govern
ment of that Territory rather than by resolution, in
forced connexion with distinct matters But these
questions here and have been made the subject OF de-
bate by senator's who have preceded me, propose to
state my own impressions in regard TO them.
| And wish to say, in the first place, that do not
doubt the constitutional power o Congress TO admit Tex
as The power TO admit new States is conferred upon
Congress oy the s N ns S nS%sd aSS SS
gress into This Union Is the language OF ihe constitu-
ton. Statesmen and constitutional LAWYERS OF great
ennence have denied, aware, that this power
designed 10 extend to the admission OF foreign States but
| see no such limitation in the instrument Itself
But power 10 admit new State is a very different
thing from power covenant for the future admission
OF other States 10 be created OF the States admitted
In my Judgment the latter is completely beyond, as
the former is completely within, the powers OF Congress
The question OF admission must be addressed 10 the Con-
gress TO which the application Tor admission is made and
must be determined according to its own discretion, un
controlled by any action OF any preceding Congress.
do not say that Congress propose terms condi
lions of admission or none that will be binding think
otherwise only say that Congress cannot, upon
the admission Of Sate bind the discretion OF sub
SCI Congress in respect to the admission Of other
new States This seems 70 me too PLAIN for argument
but let me add single illustration Suppose Congress.
upon the admission OF State, should agree that
as any District within il should contain five thousand in
habitants il should be admitted State would that
stipulation bind future Congress think not.
Lam very far therefore, from concuring in the views
of The honorable from Massachusetts regard
the obligation TO admit new slave States out OF Texas.
confess sir that somewhat surprised by the agu-
ment which he addressed to / was aware that no
one had zeaously opposed the admission OF Texas
than that distinguished senator. In his strongest Ian
guage--and no man stronger language-he had de-
MED the constitutonsty OF the resolutions OF
,ion After the adoption OF these resolutions, and after
compliance with the conditions and acceptance OF the
rendered by them the part of Texas when,
according 10 the argument OF the senator from Georgia.
delivered upon that OCCASION the faith OF the government
was firmly bound, he had stl spoken and voted against
her admission This determined and unyeldng opposi-
ton was understood TO be based only upon
lion OF the uncenstutionaly OF the measure, but also
upon fixed and settled hostility 10 the extension Of
slavery, and to the increase either branch OF the egs
laure, any department of the government OF the
slave power. was startled therefore, when heard the
senator declare, not only that he regarded the constu
tionaty of the admission OF Texas matter adjudged,
and not now open 10 question in any way, but that when
the proper time for the enactment shall arrive Congress
will be bound TO admit four new slave States out OF
Texas Sir, Ideny this obligation The history OF those