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

Ia he prouoston tat that deeg aon that deputzao that
euensncy power which confer ON them shall not be
comfortable think that justice 10 myself requires that
should say that If their action hagany IN violation OF
the constitution OF the United States, should insist upon
Its being controlled have said however, as southern
man. that | am willing make this advance towards re-
storing something like the harmony which once EXISTED IN
this glorious republic do not believe Il rs anything but
an adj vance the sentiment OF honor do not believe tits
going % confer on the South any power The North have
the power and take II from them but If they
had magnanmty with they would not use the language
of reproaeh and threats and eonlumely The belief that
deluded people cannot be informed Is mstake-thal
tainted may be saved from putrefacton
The has told what dire consequences are to
come ia the future Let them come The sooner know
my under the threats which made here the better for
me- shall live, perhaps, to see the day when they
will be fulfilled but have those dear TO me who may be
affected by them and if | upon my deah-bed,
should ncucae upon them the necessity Of standing true
the lessons of selfrespecL would tell every child,
would tell every relation have, TO perish sooner than 10
submit the injustice which many disposed to heap
upon them. But SIR enough OF this have not the least
idea that the northern people, If fairly appealed to- would
confirm the verdict indicated by of their representatives,
have confidence in the public mind when IT is fairly
lghtened by intelligence and free discussion have rend
history, sir and know that any one who has peculiar
notions and cannot elevate his mind above the prevailing
sentiment of the day, capable OF understanding the
distinctions of society. am not one OF those who are 30
partial as to make an er pars decision hsd no, the least
fair after what my neghbor lMr WALKERl had said, to
| say thus much.
when this debate shall be read great injustice will be done
to me- unless the from South Carolina correcs his
| remarks and ask him to do it.
Mr.. BUTLER. Not word, as far as think now.
| Mr.. WALKER But will satisfy the senator that. in
justice to me, he ought to do it.
| Mr.. BUTLER. Certainly, then, would 40 so.
Mr. WALKER. Any who will read the senator's
remarks he has delivered them without reading what
said would the conclusion that had threatened
him and his southern colleagues in the Senate Now what
did let fall from my lips which sounded like III l. in the
kindes terms which knew how to spoke in warning
to the South. spoke in warning of what thought might
arise and what endeavored my great depreca
ton of, and which, said would greatly depore. Yet
the senator's speech will appear charging with hav-
stood up here and threatened men that they passed
this BILL slavery should be abolished in the District of CO.
umba the internal savetrade between the States should
be abolished and the Wmot provso set up in the Terrific
ries. made any such threat animated for
instant that would be an advocate Of any such thing
That however, will be the construction of the senator's
| speech
be understood exactly in this way that expressly said
did believe of him. bu. he Of those who
was beating the drum to make others tight
Mr.. WALKER. No; you did not say that at all, nor
intimate it.
Mr. BUTLER said that the gentleman did not under
take to say that he would do the things which he mem
toned for do believe he would do not undertake
say that the North would do them but he said that
might introduce such state of things would induce the
North to do them. Is not that so?
| Mr.. WALKER. ! said, what shall continue to say,
fear the result of this agitation being opened again
| fear it for myself
Mr. WALKER. fear it for those who are disposed to
stand by the peace which was made in 1850. Why, sir,
what harm was being done to our southern friends at the
opening of this session of Congess' What agitation exist
ed Who proposing any agitaoni am not threaten
ing the honorable senator; God forbid that should
never threaten know he is the last to be moved by
threats He need have boosted of that here for know
| it as well as he.
LIE, another fact however show how necessary
il for him to revise his remarks. Who that will read them
will suppose that l. who his nearest neighbor in the
Senate expressly stated that willing to sacrifice my
right rather than establish slavery when, in fact was
LANG nf
holder sN''''' - ''eo : - 80 $500
| Mr. BUTLER. Did you not adopt iii
Mr. WALKER. No. at all. / never thought of saying
such thing but since you have mentioned that will tell
you that will vote to establish slavery, either
pressly implicitly, if know it.
Mr.. BUTLER l do not ask that Nobody asks you
| Mr.. WALKER. You do not ask it expressly, know,
but you do impliedy.
He says following the train of the senator from Connec-
lieut. Mr.. ToucEr,l that il tho Louisiana law was to be
revived my position would be rightthat this bill would
be affirmative establishment Of slavery but he that
ought to look to those provisions which declare II to be
the true and meaning Of this egsae slavery
into the Territories IL the expression stopped there adj
nit that il would not neuaze the effect OF the revvng
the French law but that itscf neurazed by what fol-
lows"nor to exclude II therefrom. So, while the first
branch of that clause nsuzes the effect of reestabsh
ing the French law permitting slavery the second branch
neutrazcs that which has gone before and leaves pre-
cscly as though were simple revival Of the French law
establishing slavery The first branch of the clause would
concede negative the presumption that the slave law
vyed that being neuazed the subsequent
leaves If nothing said the subject There
be doubt about il Take out the neutraizpg clause
ferred TO- and will not the bill have the meaning
now has with them Ii will because both expressions do
change the effect of the BILL but simple dec araon
that Congress- its part does propose to introduce
slavery exclude from these Territories But does
that expression free the bill from the effect which viii neees
sary result from the repeal Of the repeating stautc Ger
tainy II leaves it not particle less subject to the
objection that it athrmatively establishes slavery.
As said before, know that such not the intention
of the from Illinois. How do know IT. Because
have heard him say because have niely that
over his signature he disavowcd it in TO
article published in northern paper He denies that this
his intention and yet the frame Of his proposition
neutraze his explanation that subject to lea
il though both branches of the amendment, which
has adopted his motion, excluded In this
connexion il that remarked that Mr. Clay, himself
stakeholder had soenly declared, in his place in the SEN
tablish slavery where did exist he would suffer his
right arm be severed from his body do not, however
wish my friend from South Carolina to attribute this Ian
gungc to do not arrogae myself the right to say
any such thing All wish to say that will not vote
for proposition afhrmntvely to establish slavery.
There epsthcr point to which deem II necessary tc
refer after remarks Of the from South Carolina
He charges with being perfectly willing leave things
as they arc where there is law excluding slavery
but unwilling do where there is law permitting
should like 10 know where he found me that position
He had reference presume to the organization in 1850 OF
the Territories which had acquired from Mexico There
he inmaes the Mexican law abolished slavery and
seouen,ly he ntimnes willing then to be scn, upon
tor and his colleague that time Mr.. Calhoun differed