The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1852-06-24

to effect division of California so as to la
open its southern portion to the introduction of
Slavery the proposition for division was re-
newed. at least half a dozen times in the SEN
ate. But these questions were settled by the
admission of the whole of California, and as
non-slaveholding State. The two Conyen-
tons in resolving to abide by the Compro-
mise acts, or, in the language of the Wing
resolve to receive and acquiesce in that series
Of acts, us a settlement of the questions they
embrace, resolve therefore, not to disturb the
act admitting California, and not to reopen the
question of its division with a view of allow
ing Slavery to occupy its southern portion
This is the plain, unmistakeable meaning of
the pledge assumed in both resolutions.
Now, does any pro-slavery man really intend
to be bound by such pledge! VIII it be
recognised by single Southern member of
either House of Congress- should the conspira-
cy against Free Labor in California succeed so
far as to bring an application to Congress from
that State for division! We know it will not
Already, members from the South, most vo-
cferous in favor of fnality tests, have boldly
proclaimed their purpose in this respect. Last
Monday week, in the House, while crowds of
delegates, on their way to the Wing Conven-
ton in Baltimore, were in attendance, Mr.
Gentry of Tennessee, in an elaborate speech,
announced to the Northern Wings the terms
on which their Southern friends would here
4. Al A. IL. IL
of his remarks. Mr.. Campbell of Ohio pro-
pounded to Mr. Outlaw of North Carolina who
had taken precisely similar ground, the follow
ing question
@The admission of California with Consti-
tuition prescribing her territorial limits, and
excluding slavery therefrom, was one Of the
measures reported by the Compromise Commit
tee of thirteen and which was passed by that
Congress | desire to inquire of that gentle
man whether he, as a North Carolina Wing,
stands prepared to pledge himself for the pres
ent, and for the future, to resist every attempt
which may be made by the people of California
to divide that State, 50 as to create slave
State -
Mr.. OUTLAW replied
81 have to say that California, by the act to
which he has alluded, is admitted a sovereign
State into this Union, and that she has the
same right and the same powers as any other
State in this Union-that in my opinion, when
ever her people shall call upon the Congress of
the United States to divide her territory, and
they shall deem it for the interest of the cOun-
try that it shall be divided, it may be done with
out any infringement OF the COMPROMISE meas
ures"
In reply to the same question. Mr. GENTRY
said:
Il will remark to the gentleman. in reply,
that stand with respect to California precisely
as do with respect to Virginia. The princi-
pies upon which State may be divided are
prescribed in the Constitution, and every State
that wants slavery has a right to have it, Ohio
has a right to have it now, if she nts it, and
can establish it tomorrow, if she chooses.
Mr. CAMPBELL. | understand the gentle
man from North Carolina, MIR. Outlaw to |
take the same position, viz That they will not |
oppose the erection Of a slave State out of a |
part of the territory now included by the Con !
sttution of California, and will assert in gen
eral terms in relation to every one of those
Southern Wings who abandoned the Wing
caucus, that that is precisely their position upon
this question of fnaity. If am incorrect they
may now so state.
"Mr TooMBs No doubt of it, 1t ought to
be.
Mr.. CAMPBELL. They assert that it is n
part of the Compromise
Mr. GENTRY. The Compromise cannot re-
peal the Constitution.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Here is the condition of
things and want it to go forth to the people
of this country-ay, to this great national par
ty which is about to assemble at Baltimore
that while these gentlemen invoke to their aid |
the veto polcer of the Executive of this land, to
prevent the people from exercising their const-
tutional right to legslatc upon the law with re-
gard to the reclamation of fugitive slaves they
claim the right to divide that free State, which
was admitted as such, as part of this Com
promise. 1t is to be a fnality 50 far as the
claims of the Southern gentlemen are concern
ed, but not finality in regard to the adms-
sion of California as a free State"
Look at the position of the shareholders.
They decline the test they impose on the North
they reject the bonds they fasten upon the
North they gag and bind the North, while
they hold themselves free of speech and hand
to say and do what their interests may dictate
They 90 into National Conventions, and unite
with their non-slaveholding brethren in a
pledge "to abide by" the act admitting the
Whole of California as n -sldUehOlding State,
or, what is the same thing to receive and
acQuesce in said act "A settlement in
principle and substance of the questions it en-
braced" which were shall it be divided, one
half to be admitted as a non-saveholding
State, the other organized as Territory with
no proyiso against Slavery, OF shall it be ad-
mitted entire as a non-slayeholding State =
And then coolly announce their purpose to act
upon one of these questions whenever 1t may
suit them Just as if it had never been settled,
and AS if they had not pledged themselves
/" to abide by" that settlement This is the
value of your fnality tests
The answers of Messrs Outlaw and Gentry
leave us in doubt in regard to their views on
the subject of the division of n State They
seem to think that a State has right to divide
itself, and that its application for the sanction
of Congress to such division is imperative.
They do not say this in terms, but their Ian
guage implies it, What says the Constitution
New States may be admitted by Congress
| into this Union but no ner State shall be formed
or c,ecred w,thin the jurisdietion Of any other
State, nor any State be formed by the junction
of two or more States or parts of States,
,uthom the consent Of the Legislatures Of the
States concerned as weH as Of Congre~.'-(Sec.
3, Art iv, Fed COM
A new State cannot be formed within the
jurisdiction of California, first, without the
consent of it's Legislature then the consent of
Congress Should the Legislature give con-
sent and the Constitution Of California be so
| nmended as 10 mike this consent cfiectual