The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-07-13

ts.Er a "a y
IN whatever shape it was presented; at least in
relation TO that part which treated Of the COM
promise. lie might have said hitherto, that he
was IN favor OF the compromise, but vet he
should 60 against it. He was one Of the oriqi-
majors ofthis convention which movement COM
menced with small meeting in Mississippi
without dictation from any quarter That meet
ing called the October convention 1t was
charged that it was gotten up by those who
were in favor of disunion, and that those who Ia
vored it were guilty Of treason. He started
from home with fear and trembling, not know
ing that he should meet man here. Under
these circumstances he would have taken any
compromise at ALL Buthe found that the spark
of public patriotism burnt bright and strong, and
he again therefore took his stand. He did not
fear charge of Inconsistency, for his reason WAS
given to guide him in such cases. He was against
the Report and he cared not what name sane
toned it, He held 1t to be impotic TO pursue
a course calculated to throw off men, and that
Report was calculated to- divide U.S. We should
not arm those who were opposed to US, and
when you armed the opposition, you armed the
abolitionsts. 4, ia, taa H sa.-. r.. ..,
He would admit that the Report was able
that il was well written--a good argument for
Congress; but what was an argument there,
was no argument here. He was in favor of the
amendments. He asked that the other portions
proposed to be amended be once more read
al McRae here read the portions alluded to by
Judge s. s.>.ty... ......
Judge 8. continued. The compromise bill
was discussed as grievance; the other was a
plain straightforward structure on Congress-
He came here to discuss grievances, but not to
discuss the bill in question as such, until it was
Al - No or sat mt ha
bill as grievance-it was our own PROPOSE
ton to some extent, and we could reach it by
the usual channels Of legislation. The couven-
ton sat for higher purpose--to do that which
could not be done by ordinary legislation 1t
was when the people could not have redress
through the ordinary means, that they must try
others a,f M Ms--sHgry, g.. 4es.ssa... '.. .
Mr.. Rhett here said, that the Address did not
treat of the compromise as grievance--I,he
compromise as yet was no grievance--it was not
passed--it had no existence
Judge :. here read another portion OF the Adj
dress He said that when Congress proposed
to exclude slavery from California, it was evil
to be reached by extraordinary means. When
we could have redress by the ordinary means of
legislation, it must be resorted to. Evils should
not be set up and combatted. The compromise
bill has not vet passed. Does any one believe
it will pass Why then discuss thing which
may have no existence! If we went on thus
the bill might be put an end TO in Congress, and
the Address then would amount to nothing.
The abotionists might say to us, they were AS
much opposed to the compromise as we were,
and would assist us to put an end TO it. They
were discussing matters here which might be put
an end to- He was not sent here to advise Con
gress il was for the people to advise their
members. They were on higher grounds-to
make the issue with the Northern people. If
the evil is in Congress, the power is not here to
arrest it. The North does not present the CON-
promise bill as an issne--it is our own. The
opposition is so deemed there, that he considered
the proposed measure rs mt an end. He did not
believe it would be unconstitutional to admit
California Other gentlemen might differ with
him; but they ought not to send forth debatable
matter. He believed Congress had power to
admit California.
! 1t was commended in the Address, that it would
be unconstitutional and yet it is said that it
might be assented to. How could we assent
to ii, if it was unconstitutional? Why, too. dis
| cuss the compromise bill in the Address when
it was not in the resolutions? The one ought
to be based upon the other and the convention
ought not to put forth any thing on which it
could not stand. There were differences of
opinion abroad and at home; and unless you
strip the proceedings of Objectionable matter,
matter you may call conventions forever, but it
would be like scaling spirits from the vastly
deep" they would not ''come." The compro-
mise bill had never been an issue before the peo-
| pie of Mississippi and he did not feel that he
had any authority to act upon it, If it was
grievance, it was grievance supplied by the
people of all portions of the country, North and
South, by some of the people of Mississippi, and
some of those of Tennessee, as well as by mem
bers of Congress- Whether i'm what he had
said, he had expressed his views exactly, he did
not know; but he would say to all in conclu-
sion, that this should be convention of compro-
mise.
: REMARKS OF Ex-GovERHoR MATTHEWS, OF
MIssIssIrpI-Mr. Matthews said, that before the
adjournment of the Convention, he felt it to be
his duty to make an explanation in relation to
the call for this convention. % -. -
1t has been charged that the Southern move
ment to resist Northern aggression originated
with Mr. Calhoun, and that the object of it was
a dissolution of the Union; that owing to the
suspicion which rested upon South Carolina,
Mississippi was selected to make the move and
that those who called the first convention, in
that State, were under his influence, and were
guided by his directions The man who first
made this charge, and who tried to sustain it
Col Tarpley, knew it was false when he made
it. Neither Mr.. Calhoun nor any other person
out of the State Of Mississippi was consulted,
or had any knowledge Of that call, until after it
was made and it was not until the first Conven-
ton or Central Meeting was held, and the pro-
ceedings sent to Col Tarpley, approving its
objects, was written. a. ....t an
Those who called that meeting, and those
who participated in its deliberations, had no
desire to dissolve the Union. Their proceed
ings and address proved their object to be
its preservation, by maintaining the rights secu-
red by the Constitution. Mississippi considered
those rights violated, and the Union in danger
of being changed from Confederacy of equal
sovereignties to a consolidated despotism, gov
crned by an unrestricted and unscrupulous me-
jority, Mississippi could do little by herself,
and she was unwilling to act without n consul
tation with her Southern sisters; she desired TO
consult with the sages of the old mother States,
whose distractions in 1898 saved the Constltu-