The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-07-18
condition of Upper California, the senator from

condition of Upper California, the senator fror
Kentucky has perfect right to ask me, and
shall be explicit in my answer TO his condItion
Lower California, or California below 800 3C
Well, will say to the Senate al once, that
as TO be formed into a territorial government
as | suppose il will be or would be, would
have territorial government with somewha
of these provisions in it:a general autnoii'y
legislate, such is common IN an yer i i
governments / would have such Provison,s, III y
that if 1t is TO be compromise, u sno.iu DC ~
Missouri Compromise. would have the terri'o-
rial Government, south of $50 30 10 carry with II
all the Incidents all the rights and all the obsa-
lions Of the Missouri Compromise. tesIl
When speak of the Missouri Compromise,
intend to speak explicitly ! have yielded to IT.
IL was not my choice, but believe my consult
nents would yield to it for the purpose of peace
and the preservation Of this Union--and they have
made many sacrifices for it, and given many ex-
pressions of their attachment to il. | repeat that
would be willing to adopt that line with the
rights, Incidents, and obligations OF the Missouri
Compromise Now, sir, what were the rights
and incidents of that COMPROMISED AT the
time the Missouri Compromise line $50 3U
was run, all the territory known as the Louisiana
territory was slave territory, and by that act
north Of $50 30 was subjected to the celebrated
provision of the ordinance of 1887, to wit, that
slavery could not and should not, whilst 1t was
IN Il territorial condition, go beyond that line.
But what was the fact so far regards South of
the Missouri Compromise line, 1t was known, not
that slavery should necessarily exist there, but
that the right of one to carry his, slaves there
should be perfect. There was nothing 20 prevent
1t; and say, in answer to the inquiry of the SEN
ator from Kentucky, that when claim $50 so /
do not intend to claim, under the cloud of name,
but intend to claim the principles; ! do not in
tend to be satisfied with the mere name of the
thing, and to have my constituents to repose with
deceptive confidence on worthless adjustment,
eitheras it regards actual rights that may be claim
ed, or political doctrine that may save them in
Their future rights. That is my answer to the in
quiry of the distinguished Senator from Kentucky.
cannot say that | very much embarrassed
by the question whether the Mexican laws pre-
vail in this territory, and thereby exclude slavery
IL they do, then mere line of 800 80 will do no
good. If they cannot operate to exclude slavery,
Then there is no harm in saying so, if anything is
to be effected under the doctrine of compromise.
In saying thus much wish to be understood as
asserting principle that the South is moi to be
excluded from any part of this territory.
have reluctantly come to the support ofthe Mis-
souri, Compromise, but have yielded to il because,
perhaps, the great dangers OF the present crisis
may be for time averted Time and acques-
cence in this celebrated compromise have impaired
10 it their sactioning influence. II originated in
the confidence that it would close the controversy
between the different sections. Its operation has
been to give power to make controlling majority
the humiliating condition Of taking what we car
I, and not what the Constitution or ven COM
promises have given or recognized. The South
must now look TO the real doctrines and operative
principles of any compromise TO which she may
be required to give her assent She wishes to
know whether it is the deliberate purpose Of a
majority to deny 10 her the rights Of equality in
the enjoyment Of common property? BY the
Missouri Compromise, she assents to be excluded
north of 36o 30, and only to have common rights
south,pf it. In this view of the subject, them |
should require free territory for ala territory
into which all would have right to 60 with their
slaves, as with any property--the Southern plant
Ell with his property, ms well as any other person
with his property, from whatever part of the
Union. | would have that territory open from al
distractions When ] say this, / do not know
that slaves would ever go there l want no pro
vision by which am to have guarantees to carry
my slaves there that is, no law expressly author
izing the carrying of property there. j want
nothing by which, in the popular slang of the day
slavery is to be {" extended | ask for no suc,
legislation at all upon this subject. ask for an
eligibility, mere right. And, sir, in the ceebra-
Ted compromise which was proposed here once
BEFORE in relation to this very subject, (the Clay
ton Compromised this very line was proposed
with declaration in the bill thatit should carry
with it the rights, incidents, and obligations Of the
Missouri Compromise. The South was not a
one time united in favor of the measure, but sine,
men tere mas peeh great uedl OF agitation IN tn'
country. . '"4 .."
Well, Mr.. President, the question which obvi
ously suggests itself is, will slavery go into til,
territory south Of $50 a0r ia it probable tina
shareholders will settle there with their property
am not prepared to answer these questions, Blu
do say, that if there is prospect by which thu
stakeholder can make available slave labor, so al
TO make 1t more profitable than employing it in
sugar, cotton or rice, then there is something
substantial involved in the issue, and we have a
right to make and maintain it, not only con-
s,iutional right, but in some measure to claim il
AS of proprietary value. And if there be this sub
stance in our claim, gentlemen can no longer dis
pense with it as an abstraction; they can no lon
ger hold it up as mere idle, fanciful thing, in
PRODUCED for the purpose of mischief and agitation
! have not said whether or not believe that sla
very will 60 there do not know. have al
ways had my doubt Of it, but il slavery can exis
there proftably, and cannot be carried there, ther
this is no mere abstraction. The point Of view il
which have always regarded it as important al
prospectively involving doctrine Of vital import
nnce To the Southern portion Of this Union--as q
principle Of honor and right-it has associate
OF which it cannot be Invested
Mr.. President, is it nothing that we should con
tend for the tenure of an honorable political ex-
istence' Is it nothing that we should contend foi
the tenure of that kind of existence by which we
can be regarded by the laws and Constitution oil
hers of the Confederacy? Suppose that slavery
should not go there, and gentlemen say it will no
go there, whilst they taunt the South for contend
ing for AN abstraction Improbable in itself, an'
one which was introduced for mischief, repl
that you have made the issue, not us, but we wi
meet it, But, sir, it is something more than
mere doctrine of honor, affecting the equality
abe different members of this Union. regard
az a doctrine of prospective advantage, and on
which we oughtro contend for, looking to til
fact and the hazards of the past as regards prime
pies settled heretofore by compromise.
Ii would have been better for us had we not it
dulged il, policy founded in the lust of conque:
and territorial acquisition, and il may be well
we were to restrain that disposition hereafter.
am not one of those who believe that this countr
is stronger more glorious by the acquisition c
new territory, and / never have been. But if
should be asserted a settled doctrine that an
future acquisitions that may be made, either b
arms or by treaty, shall be exclusively set apa'
for the -slaveholdmg population, how can yo
expect consistently with honor, that the citizen
of the slave-hoding States should embark in
war, or that their representatives should conser
Il. Al.