Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-06-01

by a Southern Etemoer, there was, indeed.
as Mr.. Calhoun described it, a solemn pause
in that committee. All hope Of 'aihicabls
settlement for the moment vanished, aud
unnatural contention seemed likely to pre-
vail amongst US. 1t was then proposed to
try the last resort-the Court established
by the Constitution to, settle all judicial
questions-to rest the present hopes on this
as the ark of our safety. sTwo-thirds of the
committee joyously concurred in the prop!
osition. We came into the Senate with
three-fourths Of the committee decidedly id
favor Of this last proposition and one-fourth
hesitating, but not fixed against us at the
time when we made the report. =. 1
Now, sir, | desire to call the attention q
the Senate for q few moments to the history
of What oocarred in the Senate after the raf
port was made. In obedience to the der
cision of the committee, / drafted the Conn
promise Bill of 1848 and by reference to
page ATT Of the Journal for that year, it
viii be seen that, as chairman, l reported
it as a bill ''to establish the territorial gov
ernments of Oregon, California and New
Mexico; which was read, and passed to q
second reading" x sa54 acrq
Mr.. Clayton went on TO recite the vari-
Gus amendments and p~rovisos that were pro-
posed by opponents Of the bill in the Senate,
which were Intellectual. The bill passed
the Senate. with this clause, referring the
rights of the Shareholders TO the courts, ems
bodied in it, as its very life andsoul. The
vote on it was 80 for and % against it,
Mr. Clayton thus proceeded /: ~
"Well, sir, what were the principles con-
tanned in that bill? The bill made provisa
ion for the organization Of Territories in
Oregon, California and New Mexico. LII
New Mezico-I call the attention of the
Senate to that, as the organization of Utah
subsequently in 1851 was on the same
principle-provision was made for the ter
%ritorial government by directing the. APP
pointment of a Governor, and Secre tarJ,
and three Judges, Who besides performing
the APPROPRIATE duties incident to theirown
offices, were to constitute a Legislative
Council for that Territory. The twenty
sixth section of the bill provided that this
Legislative Council should haze ALMOST in
the very terms subsequently used in the
Kansas.Nebraska act.-ED~. INDEX, the
pot0er to 5egislate upom all subjects consistent
ruth the Constitution and zaws ofthe United
States, but no poyer to prohibit or establish
african Slavery By 'laao. An appeal was
provided from all decisions of tie Terrific
riot Judges IN cases o vrits efha5eds cor
pus, or other cases whers the issus of per-
sonal freedom should be presented to tbs
Court. : +
This was indeed a non-intervention bill.
By these means the parties in a controversy
to personal freedom were necessa-
rily driven into. the courts. Why was it
that the committee and members Of the Sem
ate agreed to compromise upon a principle
like that ?, Northern gentlemen had been
c~ontending in debate. before the committee
reported, that the South had no right to
take slaves within the limits of California
and New Mexico. They claimed that by
the decree of Guerrero, the Dictator, and
the Constitution of Mexico. slavery did not
exist in those Territories at the time of their
anne1ation. They therefore denied the
right asserted by the South to hold slaves
in those Territories, and insisted that the
whole of them should be dedicated to free
labor. The South commended that by the
iue7itable extension Of the Constitution Of
the United States to those Territories, the
Southern STAKEHOLDER had the right to hold
his slaves IL them, and denied that any
Mexican law prohibiting him from doing So,
could remain in force after their acquisition.
Thus one of those very geographical ques-'
tons so much deprecated by Washington
had arisen and | felt called upon, on the
Eth of July, 1913. to redeem the pledge
l had previously given, to compromise that
question, if Ecould, con terms equally fair
and Honorable for the North and South
Hence it was, / repeat, that l moved for
the appointment of the committee.
The South agreed with extraordinary
ananimity, to submit the validity of their
,laim to the Supreme Court. Many North
9rn gentlemen agreed to do the same thing;
out there was, by no means, the same una
in regard 10 it at Ghe North which
at the South. Still there was, asI
lave shown from the vote, an overwhelm-
ng majority of the Senate in favor of the
ill of 1848, which carried out the princi-
lie. The bill, having passed the Senate,
vas. sent to the House of Representatives,
IS not necessary for me to state its fate
here. It was defeated by an indirect vote
# ITO to 81, laying it on the table !; and
will find, by looking over the journal,
hat three-fourths, perhaps .fve-sixths, of
hose who opposed the bill, and destroyed
{ by laying il on the table, consisted OF
Northern gentlemen.
Such was the origin of a measure which.
hough defeated in 1913, as described by
Mr.. Clayton. was revived in 1850, perpet-
lated in 1854 and 1856, and has proved
me of the main pillars of the Democratic
ever since, until the unhappy
chism at Charleston. 1t originated with
committee of which Mr.. Calhoun was the
master spirit. 1t received his honored sane
ion. 1t was thought by him a sufficient
,asis of peace between sections ; and who
hall now say that it does not furnish asuf-
icient basis for harmony and common amity
n the Democratic party? The measure is
low clothed even with a higher sanction
han when it was first proposed in a spirit
# peace and fraternity by Mr.. Calhoun.
t stands now, not merely upon its inher-
mt merits, upon which alone it stood in
.S48 but it stands also upon the plighted
'aith of the Democratic party. Shall we
,bandon q conservative and safe measure