The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-03-15

co"iihit'eo III the history OF our revolutionary
fathers, which inf rms US that they passed two
ordinances for the government of the territory
OF The United Sta'es-one for The portion north
west of the Ohio, which prohibited slavery, the
other for that southwest of the same river, ex-
pressly excluding that ant-slavery proviso. We
also learn from the Governor, contrary to that
romantic production, Mr.. RlvEs' Debates Of Con-
gress, that there were no Democrats who voted
line through Texas, in the resolutions of an.
nexation in I845, and, of course, there were no
Democrats who voted for that line originally in
1921, and, Of course, none who voted for the
prohibition of slavery in the Oregon territorial
bill Of lS4S. So there was total disappear
ance of Democracy in all the Northern States in
lS47 and l84S when their legislatures unani-
mously adopted the Wilmot proviso, and Gen
CAss also disappeared as Democrat, when he
declared in the Senate, in the debate on the
three million BILL that although he would not
vote for the Wilmot proviso rs an amendment
TO that bill, he would vote for it in the terri
toriaI bills. Hence, we learn that the first faint
glimmerings of this great Democratic principle
was in the change that went on in the public,
and in Gen. CAss' mind, when he wrote the
NICHOLSON letter.
But the progress of this great revolutionary,
constitutional, Democratic Compromise principle
was slow. Let us consider how it stood on the
Compromise measures themselves. The bill adj
hitting California as State was by far the most
important of those measures, and the most sig
nal affirmation of that principle. 1t passed the
Senate by vote of "a to Island that thirty
four were the following, viz: Baldwin, Bell,
Benton, Bradbury, Bright Cass, Chase, Cooper,
Davis, of Mass, Dickinson, Dodge, of Wis,
Dodge, of Iowa, Douglas, Ewing, Felch, Green,
Hale, IIamn, Houston, Jones, Miller, Norris,
Phelps, Seward, Shields, Smith, Sturgeon, IN
derwood, Upham, Wells, Walker, Winthrop,
and Whitcomb. A minority of those who thus
supported this great principle were Democrats,
and they were also minority of the Democrats
in the Senate--but all The Wings in The Senate,
except three, and all the Freesoilers and Alb.
ltionists, without any exception, voted for it
Those who opposed it were the following
Atchison, Barnwell Berrien, Butler, Glenn
ems, Davis, of Mississippi, Dawson, Foote,
Hunter, King, Mason, Morton, Pratt Rusk,
Sebastian, Soule, Turney, and Youlee compre-
hending mgority ofthe Democrats in The Senate
and all the Democrats Of The South except
BENTON and HoUsToN. Even Gov FooTE and
Senator CLEMENS were faithless to Governor
CoBB's great constitutional, revolutionary Com
promise, Democratic principle as adopted in that
greatest of the Compromise measures
When the same measure was before the
House, the vote equally disastrous either to it's
Democracy or the Democracy fthe Democrats
There were only ifty.cight Democrats in its
favor, but there were ninety wo Wings, includ
ing all The Freesoisrs Of both parties, and unless
Freesoilers be counted as good Northern Dem
ocats there was not majority of Democrats fol
the bill in the House. The vote against it was
fifty-six of whom Jony-s'r aoere Democrats, all
from the South, including all from Georgia. So
that the principal plan, which the profound and
original ge;HM of the Georgia governor propo-
SEES for the next Democratic platform is area-
dy occupied by nearly all The Wings, and quite
all The Freesoilers and Abolitionists. Let us now
come to the next measure of the Compromise in
the scale OF Importance, viz, the Texas bound
airy and New Mexico territorial bill. Let
us consider for moment the position of the
question Texas had been annexed with a
constitution, previously adopted, fixing her
limits from the mouth of the Rio Grande
away up beyond Santa Fe, and on the sole
condition, as to limits of their adjustment
10Th Merico by this government They
had been adjusted by treaty, with a map an
nexed, fixing them as she had fixed them
The inhabitants of California had held an illegal
convention, and had declared themselves State
with limits extending along the Pacific coast
down to 80 degrees. Both thus claimed large
territory-but the claim of Texas had beer
settled by the resolutions of annexation and by
the treaty with Mexico. The claim of the Cali
fornians had no validity whatever, and could
have none without the assent of Congress. Blu,
Texas was slaveholding, and although, as to
her, the Missouri line had been already agreed
on, which excluded slavery north of SO 80, it was
determined that portion of her territory dowr
to 80 degrees should be taken by purchase
with n threat of federal compulsion hanging
over her. But as to California, she had excluded
slavery, and therefore it was decided that her ut
tery illegal, unacknowledged and extrava
CANT claim down to 80 degrees should be rati
fled by Congress. So large portion of the
territory of Texas was thus transferred by
the Texas boundary and New Mexican terrific
rial bill to New Mexico ,chich had Just before de
clared fer the exclusion Of SLAVERY. Thus wa,
the principle established of the right of an anti
slavery people to fix their own limits and o.
the right of the federal government to bully anc
BUY out from a pro-slavery people right tc
tnFrf nr al pl,ya !