The register. (Monroe, La.) 185?-1861, 1860-09-13
Mr.. Clay ON squatter Sovereignty.


It has been represented by some Of Doug
las organs that Henry Clay held opinions on
the Territorial question 'savoring Of squatter
sovereignty;;" and in proof Of it they quote
the following from q debate in the Senate on
the 18th May, 1850. u. G- t,3,.o~ Fl
Mr.. Clay-Isdo not understand the Senator
from Mississippi as proposing that if any one
shall carry slaves into the Territory although
by the laso Of Territory he cannot take them -
the Legislative hands Of the Territorial Govern-
snent should be SO tied as to prevent it saying be
shall not enjoy the fruits Of their labor. If
the Senator from Mississippi means to say that
Mr.. DavisI do mean to say it. fh ip"tl
Mr.. Clay--If the object Of the Senator is to
provide that slaves may be introduced into the
Territory contrary to the Ter loci, and being in
troduced, nothing shall be done by the Legis-
latnre to impair the rights Of the owners to
hold slaves thus brought, certainly cannot
While am an willing to lay off the Territories
without the Wilmot Proviso on thu. .one hand,
/ or without an attempt to introduce . clause for
the introduction CT slavery into the Terri
tories-while am for rejecting both the one
and the other-I am content that the law shall
prevail and if there be any diversity Of opin-
ion as it is 1 am willing 1t shall be settled
|
try. .etssass sisse saGsss.tE
Now, it is to be observed that these remarks
of Mr.. Clay applied to the exceptional case
Of territory already inhabited, acquired by con-
quest or purchase as were California aud New
Mexico, and not to the case Of territory settled
while in possession of the United States. The
ler loci to which he alludes, is not the law Of Q
Territorial Legislature, but the law Of tht
country to which the Territory belonged be
fore,its acquisition by the United States. w
do not say that there ought, in strictness, tt
be any distinction between the two cases, bu
it is evident that such was the considera tioi
that weighed in Mr.. Clay's mind. rf
Again: whatever his opinion might hay
been, it is to be observed that he expressl.
leaves it subject to the decision Of the suprem
Court. That decision has been made, and
altogether incompatible with the theory {
: squatter sovereignty.
But VIC have more direct and Anequivocs
l expression of Mr.. Clays's views in the follow
ling resolution, offered by him in the Senate
!, the United States in the year 1887:
Resolved, That any attempt Of Congress
: prohibit slavery in the Territories Of the Unite
!, States would create a serious alarm and ju
i apprchensions would be a violation OF GOO
J faith toward the inhabitants OF, such Terrltol
who have removed thereto with their slave
and because, ,ohcn such Territory shall be admit
10 into the Union as State, The people thereof shat
entitled 10 decide that question exclusively tor the
;, selues." i
- Such, indeed, is the meaning of the expr'
u sions which has been ransacked from the recor
y of other public men, prior to the origin OF
V Douglas 'sdoctrine. They speak OF the inha
H. tants of a Territory as having such and su
v matters within their own control, meaning
IL course, ,chea the Territory is admitted as $40
s' 1t was not necessary to say SO specihcal
e. until within a few years past, because I
~ Douglas doctrine had not been invented
81 it could not occur to any one to construe su
III expressions with reference to it. :