The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-23


coz She had according the census Of 1880 sxty-one
thousand five hundred and oryeyen people at the time the
New Mexico bill passed government had oeen existing
there for fifty or hundred years The men living n the
Territory interested in the so they had derived their
titles from the old Spanish government they had been eau
gems Of Mexico; so that the cases are IN no degree parallel
And yet, IN that case think was impoydent Tor
Congress give such high grade Of territorial
government 10 New Mexico although there was population
enough for IT,
Mr.. SEWARD. They were citizens under the treaty.
MIR. CLAYTON. Yes; and none but citizens Of the
United States, and Mexican citizens recognised by that
Mr.. DOUGLAS | did not quote the New Mexico bill,
The Utah bin the one to which referred.
Mr. CLAYTON. shall speak Of Utah presently ou.
am talking Of New Mexico, because your Utah and
New Mexico bills are in the same words.
MIR. DOUGLAS. But the people were different, and
wish to confne you the parallel.
Mr.. CLAYTON. have something TO say to you about
Utah All will come in its good time; but for the pres
ent, will speak TO you about New Mexico You and !,
SIR IN le4S thought and the Senate of the United States
then thought that such power should be conferred upon
the legislative council of New Mexico is given IN this
bill II not conferred by the bill of lS4S BECAUSE as
stated in debate, senators did not believe al that uue
that even they were fitted to exercise the duties OF segov
eminent
But now to the Utah case which the honorable
senator dwet with so much emphasis | understand the
honorable senator be the author of The Utah bill There
were according to the Of 1850, than eleven
thousand inhabitants in Utah. Amidst the tumult and dis
traction excited by this question IN 1885, Congress aed
to exhibit IFS usual wisdom in single instance, Il might
well be pardoned Was it wiser put it to the honorable
gentleman here it wise was 1t judiclous on That
occasion to erect territorial government for Utah. win
little than eleven thousand inhabitants and with the
peculiar institution and the theocracy that exists there!
do not wish pass review the acts of my predecessors
in Legislation to censure them can only say now, that II
the Utah bill here before this day, would vote
against any such organization of territorial Legislature and
government there. They entitled to 1t. II was
violation of the principles of the old ordinance of 1857 But
air. Congress thus legsated with eleven thousand IN the
Territory does that form precedent for the case before us
The Utah act of 1850 departure, and Il Think will
melancholy
the established principles of the republic God knows
what will be the issue of it The desnies of that people
are in the hands Of the Almighty andl do not undertake
to predicbut fear that shall have and trouble
from the establishment of that very territorial government
u obtained It's organization separate from New Mexico o.
which IT was part contrary to the welknoWn OPINION OF
President Taylor who desired that the Mormons should
never have government distinct from the other people OF
the Territory it acquired from Mexico He desired
that, by organization under government the Nor
mons should be absorbed, they would have been IN the
American and Mexican population of New Mexico Con-
uary to his opnon of these compromise measures OF
1850 set apart vast territory expressly for the purpose OF
making Mormon Territory and Norman State The
result has beena Mormon theocracy virtually established
by law. The whole government was given to the Nor
mons The child may rue that unborn, the of that
act. a...a @@s ae
Mr. DOUGLAS. AS the senator attaches great imports
to this matter will state that have obtained the facts
in relation to Washington Territory, which created last
year According to the census taken Of that Territory
there only three housand of population there Oregon
had between eight and thousand when established
territorial government there.
Mr. CLAYTON. Oregon had more, cir. But let us not
SO leave Utah speak of Washington BY the fifth
section of the Utah but citizens resident the
Territory the of the passage of the could VOTE
But by the senator's BILL stands, aliens may VOTE
and residence required for the good that there
are residents there The Indian intercourse did not
extend to New Mexico or Utah until the seventeenth
section IN each Of the territorial bills expressly carried
the laws of the United States there 1880 So his Utah
case miserable the precedent is fails him in every
tal particular TO which object
Then as to Washington Territory if it really had but
L O
is clearer than that the proposition passed without
consideration nothing be clearer if his statement be
correct, than that it downright violation of all the
principles established by he fathers of the republic But
the organization of this Territory not like that he proposes
for Nebraska. None but resident citizens vote in
Washington Territory and small as IS compared with
Kansas and Nebraska anited that furnishes prece
dent TO justify unparalleled attempt TO create territorial
of the highest grade FIVE hundred thousand
square miles, with bat three white lawfully residing
there The people interested in the soil in Washing
Ierioy Gus me men Who by this bill are to govern
IN Nebraska Territory have interest the soil, and
have none when they undertake elect the legislative
council The senator has cited all the which
he can refer TO justify this bi including Utah and WASH
ngton, and respectfully submit that susians him.
desired refer to the remarks of MIR. Calhoun the
bill OF l5aS, IN the report Of which he concued and for
which he voted defence Of The principles of tina, BILL and
~ opposition TO the doctrine Of squaiter oteregnyn
Unfortunately, understand they lost by the reporter
But in his speech of June 81 lo4s be found page 4ss
OF the fourth volume OF his works, he said
" have shown | trust, beyond controversy, that
Congress has no power whatever to the citizens OF
the southcrn States from cmgratng with their properly
the Territories of the United States give exclusive
monopoly of them TO the North 1 propose go
step further and show that neither the inhabitants of the
Territories their legislatures have any such right
very few words will be sufficient for purpose; of all
the positions aken hold that which claims the power
for them TO he the most absurd III the Territories belong
to the United Sates If the ownership, dominion and
eregnty over them be the States ohs Union neither
the inhabitants of the Territories their legislatures can
exercise any power but what subordinate them but
II the contrary could be shown which hold be mpos
sbie, II would be subject all the restrictions which
have shown the power of Congress is and for the
reason whatever power they might hold would the
supposed, be subordinate TO the constitution and controlled
by the nature and character of political
But II the reverse be rucf the dominion and sovereignty
over the Territories be in their inhabitants instead of the
United Sateshey would indeed in that case, have the
exclusive and absolute power of governing them, and might
exclude whom they pleased what they pleased But in
that they would be the Territories OF the United
States the moment acquired hem and permitted them to
be inhabited The first half dozen Of squaters would be-
come the soveregns with full dominion and sovereignty over
them and the conquered people of New Mexico and Cali
fona would become the soveregns of the country
they became the Territories OF the United Sts, vested
with the full right OF excluding their conquerors There
is escaping from the alternative but by resorting the
greatest of all absurdes-that of divided sovereigntya
sovereignty, part of which would reside in the United
States, and part the inhabitants OF the Territory. How
soveregny-the ultimate and supreme power OF State
be divided The exercise Of the powers Of sovereignty
may be divided but how there be two supreme
poworsw
Sir, the proposition IL stands in the bill abandous from