The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-06-19


rect in itself, and recognised by the people
Of the North, and especially by the Demo
cratic party. Upon the slavery question
they are in favor Of non-intervention; and
when new States shall be formed, they de-
sire that the people thereof shall be as free
to adopt such constitution as they may
choose for themselves, as were or are the
lpeople.of Illinois, or Massachusetts, or South
Carolina, or Mississippi. The proposition
now before US asserts this proposition---no
more, no less; and, for the reasons have
given, am in favor OF it.
/ Mr. BUTLER, Of Pennsylvania, renew
ed the. amendment, and said, he had voted
yesterday for the same proposition substan-
italy, when offered by the gentleman from
Kentucky, and he believed he was pretty
much alone from the Wings Of the North,
He was glad to find this morning that other.
were coming round to the same opinion. He
was not in the habit Of explaining his reasons
on all occasions for his votes, but he wished
to say that he thought it right then SO to
vote, and he thought so still. He thought
it unfortunate that the committee rejected
the proposition yesterday, for the effect which
that result was calculated to have upon the
minds Of gentlemen here, and upon the feel
Iings Of the people Of the South, as had Just
been SO strongly and eloquently sstated by
the gentleman from Illinois, Mr.. BrssELL,
He { Mr.. BGTLER) did,not feel the force Of
the objection Stated By some for refusing to
vote for the proposition, because they did
not wish to embarrass the California bill by
adding this as an amendment Why, sir,
| it was offered as an amendment to an amend
ment, and would not be attached SO as to
embarrass the bill unless the amendment it.
self should be adopted; and if that was done,
the proposition would not add to the diff
Guilty. He admitted fully the right Of the
people to form their constitution to suit them
selves, and when formed, they were entitled
to come here and claim admission as State
into the Union and that there is pro-
slavery clause in their State constitution
forms no insuperabe objection with him to
such admission, any more than that an anti
slavery clause in her fundamental law shall
form such objection. He believed such to
be the sentiment of his constituents; and SO
far as his expression of the views he enter
tanned may have an influence, he was will
ingto let it go, with the hope and expeeta-
ton that it may be sustained by those who
hereafter represent those constituents on this
floor. Such States have right to come in
on an equality with the old States, and to
enjoy all the benefits and be subject to all
the compromises Of the Constitution.
The principle Of the amendment is that
in which the admission of California is urged.
Her admission with her anti-slavery consti-
tuition is advocated on the ground that the
people there are opposed to slavery, and
have done what they had the right to do
exclude it by their own action and yet ma
| ny of those who thus think, opposed the pro-
position of the gentleman from Kentucky
yesterday. And there is the same inconsist-
ency on the other side, on the part of those
who oferths proposition, and yetoppose Cali
fornia because OF the anti-slavery clause in
her constitution, or who suffer that consider
alton to influence their opposition in any de-
gree. He thought if all parties would lay
aside their passions and frejudices, and give
fair and full expression to Their real senti-
ments, the proposition to permit State to
come into the Union with a republican con-
stitut on, the work of her own hands, recog-
MIXING or excluding slavery, as she thought
best, would receive an almost unanimous
vote here. This discussion this morning has
furnished cheering evidence that such would
be the result.
But whether this would be so or not, Mr..
B thought there was no use in quarreling
about it, and that nothing was to be gained
by refusing to admit State on this ground.
Suppose State should offer herself with
constitution containing clause permitting
slavery, and Congress should strike out the
clause and then admit her, could she not, as
as soon as she could call a convention of her
citizens, alter her constitution, reinstate the
pro-s,avery clause, and admit slavery If
she did so, would she not still be State of
the Union, on an equality with the other
States' There is no doubt Of this, nor that
if a State California for instance) should be
admitted with an anti-slavery clause, she
could Immediately afterwards change her
constitution in this respect, and become a
slave Stste. Mr.. B. did not see when there
would be any remedy, even if Ohio, or any
other State which came into the Union I'M
der the operation of the ordinance of 1887,
should change her constitution and become
slave State. If she did, however, it might
be breach Of that compact, her Senators and
Representatives would not be turned away
from the doors of the Capitol as ntruders,
having no right here. No, sir, she would
still be State Of the Union, with the rights
Of sovereign State He would add, It is
true, the admission of slave State carrie
with it that feature Of the Constitution res
specting the representation which is so OBJ
jectpnable to some. Slaves cannot vote,
though three-fifths of them are represented;
this is fixed by the Constitution under
which we all live;--and however much any
gentleman may wish it otherwise, it is not
such an objection as would influence him to
vote against the admission of a State.
He withdrew the amendment
Mr.. ROOT renewed the amendment,