The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-06-24
Washington, Monday, june "a, 1850.

all the information possible, in relation to the
state Of things on the other side of the
mountains, asked him what was the desire
Of the people in Congress; observed to him
that it was not the desire of the people Of
California 10 take larger boundary than the
Sierra Nevada; End that we would prefer
not embracing within our limits this desert
waste to the east His reply was, For
Gods sake leave us no territory to legislate
npon in Congress- He went on to state,
then, that the great object in our formation
Of State government, was to avoid further
Legislation. There would be no question as to
our admission by adopting this course; and
that all subjects Of minor importance could
afterwards be settled. Think tiny duty Ia
lmpart this Information to the Convention,
| The conversation took place between Mr.
Thomas Butler King and myself.
Mr.. Bolts. have remarked it as .
singular fact, that we have reports daily, and
almost hourly, of some important information
that has been received from some particular
sources; letters that have arrived, converse
tons that have occurred, something that
some gentleman has heard Mr.. Thomas But
Ter King say. Now, sir, take it that Mr..
Thomas Butler King, nor no other single in
dividual, is the exponent of the wishes Of the
| Congress of the United States He is but
one man on the floor of that Congress. He
gives but one vote, and that vote it is not in
his power to give whilst he remains in the
State Of California No, sir, not even that
vote, either directly himself, or indirectly
through his friend upon this floor Sir, take
it that if Mr.. Thomas Butler King did know
and had a right to tell us what were the
opinions Of the Congress Of the United States,
it would be for us to consider rsther what
our own opinions are, than those of Congress,
upon this subject. Therefore exclude the
whole testimony as totally irrelevant to this
matter" ~
| Thus, it seems, that the opinions and dis
courses Of Mr.. King, if not that of others,
did influence and control the action of the
California Convention upon this most delicate
subject.
1t is great mistake to suppose that the
highest interests Of California require her i'm
mediate admission into the Union. 1t has
been announced in the other wing of the
Capitol, that this new State must for time
be supported by the Federal Treasury, hav-
ing no revenue OF her own. 1t is the first
instance of such pretension, and is Of evil
example. States ought never to be depend
ent on the Federal Treasury.
If the report Of Mr. Jones be correct, that
there never was a surveyor in California,
then it is true that there is not COM
plete title in that country; for it is notorious
fact, that in no part Of Spain or Mexico did
the final title issue, until after survey and ju-
dicial possession. All these titles, on this
statement, are inchoate, and must depend for
validity on the future Legislation of Congress
If the statements Of Mr.. Jones are accurate,
there is not title in California that will sus-
tam an action of election. They are not
legal titles, but mere equities, requiring the
action of Congress, which in good faith their
owners are entitled to demand The inter-
ests of California require legislative action on
these subjects far more than present admis-
sion into this Union
Whatevermay be the difference of opinions
as to the extent of the power Of Congress
over the municipal and internal affairs of a
territory when organized, there can be no
well-founded doubt that the right to author
ize State territorial government is exclu-
sively in Congress. Until the territory be-
comes State, tie right to govern is in the
United States, and not in the people who
happen to be present or located on the pub
| lie domain. In the case Of Florida, the SUI
preme Court of the United States declared,
that "perhaps the power Of governing ter
ritory belonging to the United States, which
has not, by becoming State, acquired the
means Of self-government, may result neces-
sarily from the facts that it is not within the
power and jurisdiction of any particular State,
and is within the power and jurisdiction of the
United States. The right to govern may
be the inevitable consequence of the right to
acquire territory. Whichever may be the
source whence the power is derived, the
possession Of IL is unquestioned. "--( Pet
ers, 542.
! do not admit that under this power Con-
gress has any authority to destroy private
property. This cannot be done either in the
States or Territories by the Federal Govern
ment, because it is restrained by the Consti-
tuition. By express provision Of the Consti-
tuition, it may take private property for pub
lie use, first making compensation therefor
1t has no power to take or destroy private
property TO promote any general purposes Of
public good, or any real or mistaken views
of human philanthropy. Tie Federal Gov
eminent has no such mission. In the Terri
tories, Congress may remove obstacles to the
enjoyment Of property, by giving remedies
and salutary police regulations, but it can
neither exclude nor destroy it. The Fede-
raj Legislature is limited in its exercise of
power over property. Congress having in
itself no authority to exclud or destroy pro-
pcrty in the Territories, can delegate no such
power TO the territorial legislatures. II can
not confer that on another which it does not
possess itself If Territory is within the
power aud jurisdiction Of the United States,