8 
 
 3 
 
 * 
 
 J> 
 *> 
 
 N 
 
BANCROFT 
 
 LIBRARY 
 < 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 MR. M. P. GENTRY, OF TENNESSEE, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 ADMISSION OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 DELl\ ERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MONDAY, JUNE 10, Io50. 
 
 The House being in Committee of the Whole, and 
 having- under consideration the President's mes 
 sage in relation to California, 
 
 Mr. GENTRY addressed the committee as fol 
 lows : 
 
 Mr. CHAIRMAN: Congress has been in session six 
 months, occupied almost exclusively with the ques 
 tion now before this -"ommittee. Other questions 
 of public interest, various and important in their 
 nature, strongly claim the attention of the legisla 
 tive branch of the Government, but are excluded 
 from consideration. By a war with Mexico we 
 have acquired vast territories. By the treaty of 
 Guadalupe Hidalgo we have bound ourselves to 
 protect the people of those territories; to secure to 
 them all the rights of citizens of the United States; 
 itnc in due time admit them, as States, into the 
 Union. Repeated efforts have been made to redeem 
 our plighted faith in this regard, but in every in 
 stance causes, which I will develop in the course of 
 my rerrarks, have prevented legislation. We be 
 gin to realize the truth that the policy of aggressive 
 war conquest and colonization is not suited to 
 the genius of our government. With our conquests 
 there comes upon us thf question, shall Congress 
 prohibit or admit slavery in the Territories we have 
 acquired? It is a question fraught with discord and 
 danger. It has, JM a great djegrce, alienated the 
 northern and southern States, and made disunion 
 a familiar word in our pofitical vocabulary. It has 
 paralyzed the Government, and threatens its de 
 struction. The wisest statesmen and most san 
 guine patriots tremble for the safety of the Repub 
 lic. What policy has brought us into these dan 
 gers? Who is responsible for the existing state of 
 thing;? Who forewarned the country of this cri 
 sis? Who what political party is it that, being 
 solemnly forewarned, nevertheless blindly and 
 recklessly persevered in steering the ship of state 
 invo its present perilous condition? These areques- 
 tiniift which I propose to discuss with candor. I 
 intend to speak what I think. 
 
 In debating so grave a subject, I would not, if 
 left to choose fur myself, introduce questions con 
 nected with party politics. But the course which 
 gentlemen on the -other side of the House have 
 thought proper to pursue leaves me no choice in 
 this respect. They t ave debated the subject for 
 
 GIDEON & (Jo., 
 
 six months, and nearly all who have spoken on that 
 side of the House have labored to fix the responsi 
 bility for the existing state of things on the Presi 
 dent of the United States. Differing widely as to 
 the particular acts which are alleged to have pro 
 duced the present state of affairs, they agree in as 
 cribing them to him. While one gentleman urges 
 that the existing difficulties are attributable to the 
 position which he occupied when a candidate for 
 the Presidency, another ascribes them to the advice 
 which he has given to the. people of California since 
 his election; and others contend that all would have 
 been well with us if he had announced in his an 
 nual message his purpose to veto any bill that might 
 pass the two Houses of Congress inhibiting slavery 
 in the Territories we have acquired from Mexico. 
 The brief hour to which I am limited by a rule of 
 the House will not permit rne to repel, specifically, 
 these discordant imputations; but I will endeavor 
 to vindicate the President by exhibiting the true 
 causes of the present state of affairs, and by fixing- 
 the responsibility where justice and truth require. 
 I recognise the right of a representative of the peo 
 ple in the Congress of the United States freely to 
 canvass the official conduct of the President, and 
 every other Executive functionary, and hold them 
 to a rigid responsioility for their official acts. Jt is 
 a right limited only by such restrictions as truth, 
 justice, and honor impose. If these virtues have not 
 lost their influence upon the public mind, the ver 
 dict of the country will be, that the President is in 
 no degree responsible for producing those evils 
 which now excite the public anxiety. 
 
 To explain thoroughly and fully the causes 
 which have produced the sectional excitements 
 and animosities which now disturb the harmony of 
 the Union and obstruct the legislation of Congress, 
 it is necessary to go back to a period when the rep 
 resentatives of the slaveholding States, mistaking 
 the true policy of the South, violently and vehe 
 mently opposed the reception and reference of pe 
 titions for the abolition of slavery in the District of 
 Columbia, emanating from northern abolition so 
 cieties, and finally succeeding in procuring- the 
 adoption, by this House, of a rule prohibiting the 
 reception and reference of those petitions. Previ 
 ous to the period to which I refer, efforts to agi 
 tate the public mind on the subject of slavery wer 
 
 X \ 
 
 C- 
 W 
 
 u 
 
 , 
 

 r 
 
 -< 
 
 confined to a few fanatics in the non-slaveholding 
 States, who, organized into abolition societies, were 
 in the habit of forwarding- to Congress, at every 
 successive session, petitions for the abolition of sla 
 very in the District of Columbia, where", as they 
 contended, Congress had full power over the sub 
 ject. They were few in number, and the great 
 body of the northern people ', of both political par 
 ties, neither syrnpathiztd nor co-operated with 
 them. But the unwise course pursued by southern 
 representatives with respect to their petitions im- 
 
 Sarted to that handful of fanatics a power and in- 
 uence over public affairs which has largely con 
 tributed to bring the country into its present con 
 dition. Petitions on the same subject had, from 
 an early period of the Government, been from time 
 to time presented, received, and referred, creating 
 no excitement in Congress or among 1 the people. 
 It were well for the country if the same mode of 
 treating such petitions had been continued. 
 
 But, unfortunately, the southern members of 
 Congress, under the lead of the late distinguished 
 Senai< r from South Carolina, (Mr CALHOUN,) op- 
 po.-ed the r. ception and reference of those petitions, 
 placing- their opposition, if I remember correctly, 
 upon the ground that the Constitution r> ; d not con 
 fer upon Congress the power to abolish slavery in 
 the District of Columbia, and that the reception of 
 petitions praying for such an object would be an 
 implied assertion of the power to grant the prayer 
 of the petitioners; that to admit the existence of 
 such power in Congress would be fatal to the inter- 
 eats and rights of the slaveholding States ; and that 
 therefore the petitions ought not to be received. 
 Their arguments prevailed; and the rule prohibit 
 ing- the r ception ol such petitions was established. 
 At that time, the late ex- President John Quincy 
 Ada ins was a member of this House. Descended 
 from a sire who had made himsell illustrious by his 
 put lie services-! in the Revolution himself eminent 
 for high ability and extensive acquirements vene 
 rated, especially by the people of the northern 
 States, fo. his private virtues and public serviced 
 he put himself forward upon this floor, with all the 
 weight f influence rmtuiaily attaching to one so 
 charnct* :nzt d and distinguished^ as the champion 
 of me constitutional right of petition. Distinctly 
 declaring himsell oppo-ed to grunting the pray c r 
 ol the pi titicners, he nevertheless contended that it 
 ' was the right of the people under the Constitution 
 " peaceably to assemble and petition for the re- 
 dre.-s ol grievarit es;" and that it was the duty of 
 Congress to respectfully receive, refer, and con- 
 sidt r their petitions. With unexampled inflexi 
 bility ol character, he d< voted all his powers to the 
 conti st ; and, alter a struggle characterized by the 
 most excited and disorderly d bates on this floor, 
 and protracted through a petiod of several years, 
 that rule was reseiiioetf. Si nee then, abolition pe 
 titions, as in the olden time, have been received and 
 relernd every day, or at least whenever any mem 
 ber has chosen to present them, without a formal 
 motion, and without creating the least excitement 
 here or tlsewhere. 
 
 In ih- progri ss of that struggle thousands, aye, 
 hundreds of th.ou--.ands, of the people of the non- 
 slav< holding Sta'es, who had previously scoffed and 
 derided the Abolitionists, found themselves brought 
 into sympathetic association and zealous co-opera 
 tion with them. The unwise opposition of the pub 
 lic men of the South to the reception of their peti 
 tion.- had raised ihu Abolitionists into respectable 
 and honorable associations, and enabled them to 
 appropriate to (heir objects the seeming champion 
 ship ol Mr. Adams, and to identify themselves with 
 a question thtt addressed itself powerfully to popu 
 lar sympathies. Aided by the circumstances to 
 which 1 have referred, they were enabled to give 
 such a direction to political discussions as tended to 
 
 deepen, and strengthen, and diffuse, far and wide, 
 the abstract sentiment of hostility to slavery pre 
 existing in the minds of the northern people. 
 Meanwhile, southern demagogues, under the im 
 pulse of motives not dissimilar to those which ac 
 tuated the Abolitionists, had been equally energetic 
 and successful in arousing sectional passions and 
 creatingsectional hostility It was when demagogues 
 and fanatics had thus "inflamed and excited the 
 prejudices and passions of the North and the South, 
 that the question of annexing the Republic of Texas 
 to the U:.'-ed States was introduced into the politics 
 of this country. Texas had proposed to annex her 
 self to the United States during- the administration 
 of President Jackson, by whom the proposition was 
 promptly rejected. She renewed the proposition 
 during President Van Huron's administration, who 
 likewise promptly rejected it. 
 
 In the year 1840 William Henry Harrison was 
 elected President of the United States, and John 
 Tyler Vice President. In one month after he was 
 inaugurated President Harrison died, and the Vice 
 President became the President of the United States. 
 I need not dwell upon the political events which 
 followed that occurrence. They are fresh in the 
 r- collection of all who have paid aqy attention to 
 public affairs. Mr. Tyler ref Js< d to co-operate with 
 the political pa/ty which elected him, and; by a se 
 ries of Executive vetoes, prevented the adoption of 
 measures of public policy for which that party con 
 sidered itself pledged to the country. They de 
 nounced him for dishonorable political infidel 
 ity; and, with the exception of some half dozen 
 gentlemen, the Whig members of Congress placed 
 themselves in hostile opposition to the President. 
 Fierce and angry denunciations, criminations and 
 recririiinations. became the order of the day. In 
 the midst of those exciting scenes, a distinguished 
 Whig, who adhered to Mr. Tyler in that co tro- 
 versy, made a remark to me which produced a 
 strong impression- on my mind. Between that gen 
 tleman and myself very friendly relations had ex 
 isted. He haa exhibited some anxi ty for me to 
 take position with him in sustaining Mr. Tyler. In 
 the conversation to which I am referring, tie had 
 been seeking to ascertain the disposition of my 
 mind as to the policy of annexing Texas to the 
 United States, and while speculating on that sub 
 ject, he remarked, with great vehemence of man 
 ner, " Mr. Tyler holds in h ; s hands a political 
 question with which he can at any time destroy the 
 present organization of political parties." The full 
 meaning of this remark was ex^biined when Mr, 
 Tyler concluded a treaty with Texas, by the pro 
 visions of which that republic agreed to surrender 
 its nationality, and become one of the States of this 
 Union, and when other developments showed con 
 clusively that it was his aim, by means of Execu 
 tive patronage, and the question of Texas annexa 
 tion, to abstract from 4 he Whig and Democratic 
 parties materials for a third political party, by the 
 support of which he hoped to be eluded to the high 
 station to which an accident had elevated him. The 
 treaty being conducted and submitted to the Senate 
 for its ratification, that body, after long debate, re 
 fused to raiify it. It was supported and opposed, 
 indiscriminately, by Whigs and Democrats. It 
 disturbed, but did not destroy, the existing party 
 organizations. 
 
 The period was approaching when the political 
 parties of the country were to assemble in conven 
 tion for the purpose of nominating candidates for 
 the Presidency and Vice Presidency. For this pur 
 pose the Whig party and the Democratic par ty, 
 respectively , assembled in convention at Baltimore; 
 and Mr. Tyler mustered an assemblage there also, 
 about as numerous and respectable as that famous 
 company with which Falstaff was ashamed to march 
 through Coventry. Previous to the assembling of 
 
the conventions, the universal sentiment of the 
 Whig- party had designated Mr. Clay as their can 
 didate for the Presidency; and, with equal unanim 
 ity, Mr. Van Buren had been indicated as the fa 
 vorite of the Democratic party. Each of these dis 
 tinguished gentlemen were requested to make 
 known to the public their views as to the poliry of 
 annexing- Texas to the United States; and both of 
 them proclaimed their opposition to that measure. 
 The Democratic convention, seeing- that, without 
 some new question capable of unsettling- the opin 
 ions and purposes of the people with respect to po 
 litical parties and public men, they were, doomed 
 to defe-it, repudiated Mr. Van Buren and nomi 
 nated Mr. Polk, because he had expressed himself 
 in favor of annexing- Texas. The Whig conven 
 tion, without a dissenting- voice, nominated Mr. 
 Clay. Mr. Tyler's onvontion performed the work 
 for which they were convened by nominating- him; 
 but when that gentleman discovered that the Dem 
 ocratic party had robbed him of the hobby with 
 which he had expected to ride triumphantly into 
 the Presidency, he withdrew from the canvass. 
 The Democratic party entered upon the canvass 
 with the motto inscribed upon their party banner: 
 "THE WHOLE OF OaEGON AND THE ANNEXATION OF 
 TEXAS " 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I am endeavoring to exhibit the 
 causes which* have brought the country into its 
 present difficulties, and to tix the responsibility for 
 the existing- state of things where truth and justice 
 require it U> be fixed. Want of time will not per 
 mit me to present all the facts needful to a full com 
 prehension of the argument. I beg gentlemen to 
 remember ail that the i on rule of this House pre^ 
 vents me from detailing. They will remember the 
 position occup ed by thrs Whig party with respect 
 to the annexation of Texas, when, in the manner I 
 have described, that was made a purely party ques- 
 tinn in the Presidential canvas of lt>44. They will 
 remember the views put forth by the Whigcandi 
 date (Mr. Clay) in his Raleigh letter. They well 
 remember that the prominent men of the Whig 
 party, with few exceptions, everywhere opposed 
 that measure, upon the ground that annexation 
 %vould be a breach of faith with Mexico; that it 
 would probably involve the United Slatis in a w<- r 
 with that govern in at; thu it would create among 
 our people an appetite lor territorial aggrandize 
 ment that would be insatiable; that it would engen 
 der between the States sectional animosities, and 
 imperil if not destroy the Union. What was pro 
 pht-cy then is history now. Their warnings were 
 unheeded. Mr. Polk was elected to the Presidency, 
 and, under h.s auspices, the measure ol annexation 
 was consummated. Mr Calhoun, who was Secre 
 tary oi State when the treaty wiih Texas was nego 
 tiated, placed the policy of that measure upon the 
 ground that it was necessary as a means of giving 
 additional security to slavery, by increasing the 
 political power or the slavenolcling States. The 
 northern States, opposed in sentiment to slavery, 
 and unwilling to concede preponderance of politi 
 cal power to ihe southern Siaus, were naturally 
 hostile to annexation; and although they sullenly 
 acquiesced in the consummation of that measure, 
 it was obvious to all that a deep feeling of discon 
 tent rankled in their bosoms. 
 
 The war with Mexico followed close upon the 
 heels of annexation, and it was soon manifest that 
 the Presidenj, was resolved upon the acquisition of 
 territory; and when a bill appropriating three mil 
 lions of dollars, to enable the President to negotiate 
 a treaty of peace, was under consideration, the 
 gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. WILMOT,) 
 moved to amend it by attaching the proviso, which 
 has since figured so prominently in our political 
 discussions. This House, by a large majority, sus 
 tained his motion, but the Senate tailed lor want of 
 
 time to act upon the bill; and it did not become a 
 law. When Congress assembled at the succeeding 
 session, our armies had defeat d and destroyed 
 those of Mexico; and our commanders in California 
 and New Mexico were in quiet possession of those 
 provinces They had issued proclamations an 
 nouncing to the people of tho-e provinces tiiat they 
 were "annexed" to the United State-; thus disclos 
 ing, beyond the possibility ol*a doubt, th-it the 
 President had. from the beginning, prosecuted the 
 war with Mexico for the purpose of conquest. In 
 his message to Congress, he assumed that all who 
 questioned the propriety of his conduct in this re 
 spect were, in effect, opposed o their country, and 
 were "giving aid and comfort to the enemy." On 
 the motion to refer the President's menage a de 
 bate arose, during which his supporters on this 
 floor reiterated the same idea. Having participated 
 in that debate, and, inasmuch as what I .-aid on that 
 o< casion supports the position which I ;un now en 
 deavoring to establish, I hope I will be pardoned 
 for reading a short extract from the speech which 
 I then delivered: 
 
 "It is the duty of Congress, and I invoke the per 
 formance ofthat duty, to limit and cotr.rol the dis 
 cretion of the President in relation to the further 
 prosecution of the war. If Congress believes it 
 to be expedient and just to wagA a war of conquest 
 for the acquisition ol territory, let that fa<-t bo de 
 clared; arid if Congress believes it to be inexpedi 
 ent, let it assert the constitutional right of the legis 
 lative branch of the Government, by saying to 
 the President, 'thus far shah thou go, and no tar- 
 ther.' 
 
 ****** 
 
 "It is moral cowardice, when the great interests 
 of the Republic are in p<Til, to -hut our eyes, and 
 shrink front a contemplation uf the dangers with 
 whkh we are threatened. * * * 
 
 "He must be blind to all the signs of the times 
 who do. s not perceive that there is a fix^-d and al 
 most universal determination in the northern States 
 not to acquiesce in a lurther extent-ion of tenitory, 
 without attaching to such ext nsion the prohibition 
 to which 1 fjftve refer rid. iiow shall we overcome 
 this difficulty, when the question shall conn: before 
 Congress permanently to annex the t onqu-'ats of 
 the President? We have already seen, by a vote 
 of this House, that the nun slavehol ing States \vill 
 insist upon prohibiting slavery in those Tenitories. 
 Will the southern States consent to the admission 
 of free States south aud west of Texas? What will 
 Texas say? What will Louisiana say? What will 
 the whole South say? All the dangers growiug.out 
 of this question of slavery, which we ,. rt ve met and 
 overcome heretofore, are as nothing compared with 
 ttiose which will arise when ihac question shall 
 come upas the consequence of' Mr. Pole's conquests 
 and annexations. 
 
 "Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, there are bad 
 men in the North and the South, who desire a dis 
 solution of the Union, and who, without avowing 
 their object, are laboring diligently to pioduce that 
 end. The President is diiving the ship of state 
 into a most stormy and dangerous sea; and if Con 
 gress fails to act in the lofty spirit ol patriotism 
 which the occasion demands if it fails to assert the 
 constitutional rights and perform Unconstitutional 
 duties which properly belong and attach to the 
 legislative branch of the Government, by putting 
 a limit to Executive discretion in the lurther prose 
 cution of this \var with Mexico, in my opinion the 
 day is not distant^when it will require all the vir 
 tue, intelligence, and patriotism of the country to 
 preserve the Union and save the public liberty." 
 
 Mr. Chairman, these remarks brought down upon 
 me a storm of denunciation. Among others, my 
 colleagues on the other side of the House made 
 themselves prominent in attacking my course. 
 
4 
 
 They impeached my patriotism. They arraigned 
 me lor introducing- the firebrand of slavery into the 
 councils of the nation, for the purpose of impairing 
 its energy in the prosecution of a "just and glo 
 rious war." This storm of denunciation was hurled 
 against me for weeks, and until I was rescued by 
 a movement of the honorable gentleman from New 
 York, (Mr. PRESTO^ KING,) who sits before me. 
 On the morning of Jan. 5, 1847, that gentleman en 
 tered this hall with a roll of manuscript in his hand, 
 and obtaining the floor, proceeded to "define the 
 position" of the Democratic party of the northern 
 States with respect to the war with Mexico. Want 
 of time will not permit me to read that important 
 paper; but if I make misstatements with respect to- 
 it, I will thank the gentleman to correct me. In 
 substance it said: "The Democrats of the non- 
 slaveholding States intend to vote men and money, 
 to any extent needful, for the vigorous and suc 
 cessful prosecution of the war with Mexico. They 
 are in favor of acquiring territory to indemnify 
 the United States for the expenses of that war; but 
 it is with them a fixed principle, a. settled purpose, 
 not to permit the existence of slavery in any terri 
 iory that may be acquired." 
 
 Mr. McCLEBNAND. I beg- leave to say that I, for 
 one, objected to the manifesto of the gentleman 
 from New York, and urged him not to offer it. 
 
 Mr. G. resumed. It is not my purpose to do in 
 justice to any one. I remember that the gentle 
 man from Illinois, (Mr. McCtERNAND,) and, per 
 haps, two or three others on that side of the House, 
 dissented from that manifesto ; but their number 
 was quite too small to impair in any degree the 
 force of the fact which I am presenting. When 
 the gentleman from New York read his manifesto, 
 the storm, which had been so long and so furiously 
 beating upon me, ceased. 
 
 The Whigs of the northern States also defined 
 their position. They proclaimed that they were 
 opposed to extending the limits of the United States; 
 opposed to the acquisition of territory north or 
 south; but, said they, if we are overruled if, 
 against our counsels and votes, you insist upon ac 
 quiring territory, we will co-operate in preventing 
 the introduction of slavery therein. 
 
 When we of the South were thus forewarned by 
 the Whigs and Democrats of the non-slaveholding 
 States, my friend from Georgia (Mr. STEPHENS) 
 introduced a resolution, declaring the legitimate 
 objects of the war with Mexico, and restricting the 
 discretion of the President, by inhibiting the ac 
 quisition of territory. When I made the speech 
 from which I have ventured to read an extract, I 
 had in the drawer of my table a resolution, similar 
 to that offered by my friend from Georgia, which 
 I intended to offer at a suitable time. He antici 
 pated me in the execution of my purpose. I had 
 hoped when those developments should be made to 
 which I have referred, that the Democratic members 
 of this House from the southern States would c^-operate 
 with the Whigs to prevent the acquisition of territory. 
 I was disappointed in this reasonable expectation. 
 When the House voted on the resolution offered by 
 my friend from Georgia, every northern and south 
 ern Whig voted for it; every northern and southern 
 Democrat voted against it. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS. No; Mr. Cobb, of Alabama, 
 voted with us. 
 
 Mr. GENTRY. A friend informs me that Mr. 
 Cobb, of Alabama, voted with us on the question to 
 which I am referring. If my friend is correct in 
 his recollection, I must do the gentleman from Ala 
 bama the justice to say, that he stands "solitary 
 and alone," honorably isolated from his political 
 party. In the Senate, Mr. BERRIEN introduced a 
 resolution similar to that introduced here, and the 
 vote upon it was precisely like that in this House; 
 every Whig from the North and the South, with 
 
 perhaps, one exception, voted for it; and every Dem 
 ocrat from the North and the South voted against it. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, what causes have produced the 
 present state of things? What policy? Who is re 
 sponsible? Is it the President? The incontroverti 
 ble truths of history which I have presented vindi 
 cate him from that false and unjust imputation, 
 and fix the responsibility where an honorable gen 
 tleman from Mississippi, (Mr. THOMPSON,) more 
 candid than most of those who have spoken on that 
 side of the House, says it ought to rest. 
 
 That gentleman, in a speech which he made a few 
 days ago/ claimed for the Democratic party, of 
 which he is a member, the glory of annexing Tex 
 as; the glory of the war which followed that event; 
 and the^glory of adding to the Territories of the 
 United States California and New Mexico. And 
 he admitted, that all the responsibilities resulting 
 from these achievements rested upon the Demo 
 cratic party; and that, therefore, that party is 
 bound to come to the rescue and extricate the Re 
 public from the difficulties and dangers in which 
 Democratic measures have involved it. 
 
 It has been my aim to prove the correctness of the 
 admissions so c-.ai'didly made by the g-entleman 
 from Mississippi, and to show, beyond the possibil 
 ity of doubt or cavil, that the policy and measures 
 opposed by this side of the House, and supported 
 and carried through by that, have* brought the 
 country into its present dangers. Come what may, 
 our skirts are clear. If the political equilibrium 
 between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding 
 States is lost, never to be regained; if the property 
 of the southern States is thereby rendered insecure; 
 if faction and discord reign where patriotism and 
 wisdom ought to rule; if the Union, and the liberty 
 and happiness which it guaranties, are imperilled, 
 the causes which have produced these evils are 
 manifest, and the good sense of the country \vill 
 correctly decide where responsibility rightfully 
 rests. 
 
 But though, as I have shown, we can, on this side 
 of the House, justly claim to be free from all re 
 sponsibility for the present state of things, I hold 
 that every patriot is equally bound to exert himself 
 to save the country from the dangers by which it is 
 now environed. The Wilmot proviso, which reared 
 its front in this hall whilst the war with Mexico 
 was raging, has reappeared at every period since 
 the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, when an attempt 
 has been made to redeem the obligations which this 
 Government assumed by the stipulations of that 
 treaty; and the faith which we solemnly plighted 
 to Mexico yet stands unredeemed. Meanwhile, as 
 if to prepare the hearts of the people for bloodshed, 
 civil war, and a dissolution of the Union, agitators, 
 fanatics, and factionists in the northern and south 
 ern States have- been busily and successfully en 
 gaged in inflaming and rousing into activity sec 
 tional prejudices, passions, and hostilities, whoso 
 loud roar, borne to our ears by every breeze thai 
 comes from the North or the South, bodes nothing 
 but evil to the republic. Six months of the session 
 of Congress have been spent in angry debate as to 
 what measures of legislation shall be adopted with 
 respect to the Territories which we have conquered 
 from Mexico, and there is now as little prospect of 
 union and harmony on that question as at the be 
 ginning of the session; and it has been distinctly 
 threatened that, in certain specified contingencies, 
 faction will so display itself here as to defeat the ap 
 propriation bills, and thus arrest, if not destroy, the 
 government. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, this is a deplorable, humiliating, 
 and dangerous state of affairs, calling imperiously 
 upon us till to hold our passions and prejudices in 
 strict subordination to patriotism and reason, that 
 \ve may devote ourselves with effective energy to 
 the service of the country. What shall we do? 
 
To what remedy shall we resort? Where is the 
 path that wisdom bids us tread? What line of poli 
 cy will shield the country, and save it harmless 
 from impending 1 dangers? What measure, founded 
 injustice and wisdom, can we adopt that will har 
 monize conflicting 1 interests and prejudices, and 
 o-ive quiet and tranquillity to this great family of 
 .States? The consideration of Congress and the at 
 tention of the public have been for some time directed 
 to three propositions: 1st. That recommended by the 
 - dent; 2d, the Compromise bill reported by the 
 committee of thirteen in the Senate; and 3d, the 
 
 mi i compromise line. 
 
 The, last mentioned proposition is supported 
 chieriy by those gentlemen from the southern States 
 who have heretofore been most zealous and vehe 
 ment in insisting upon the constitutional right of 
 the slaveholding States to an unrestricted partici 
 pation in the territories acquired from Mexico; and 
 who have denied the power of Congress to prohibit 
 or establish slavery, or otherwise legislate upon that 
 subject in the Territories of the United States. I 
 have never, in the course of my experience, known 
 so glaring an exhibition of inconsistency by intel 
 ligent public men. To understand the effect of ap 
 plying the Missouri compromise to the territory 
 acquired from Mexico, it must be remembered that 
 slavery existed by la\v in all the Louisiana territo 
 ry acquired from France, and that the Missouri 
 compromise abolished and prohibited slavery in all 
 that territory north of 36 30' of north latitude, and 
 permitted slavery south of that line. It was literally 
 the enactment of the Wilmot proviso north of the line 
 36 30', and non-intervention south of that line. Jt 
 wad a distinct and most effective assertion and ex 
 ercise by Congress of the power to legislate upon 
 the subject ofeiavery in the Territories of the Uni 
 ted States. To extend the Missouri compromise 
 line through our recent acquisitions to the Pacific, 
 would be to enact the Wilmot proviso in about 
 four- fifth;? of the territory, and leave the residue, 
 south of that line, subject to the operation of those 
 Mexican laws which abolished slavery previous to 
 our conquest, and which, according to the opinion of 
 a large majority of jurists, remain in full force and 
 effect. I am aware that gentlemen Distinguished 
 for legal learning hold that the Mexican laws are 
 null and void; but whilst this question is undecided 
 by competent judicial authority, slavery is as ef 
 fectually excluded as if Congress had prohibited it 
 by express provisions of law. No slaveholder would 
 take his slaves into that country with the certainty 
 of subjecting himself to a long am', expensive law 
 suit, that w uld most probably eventuate in the. 
 emancipation of his r-laves. But no one believes 
 that it is possible for such a proposition to pass in 
 either House of Congress, and therefore it is a waste 
 ol time to discuss it. A fair apportionment of ac 
 quired territory between toe slaveholding and 
 non-slaveholding States constitutes thr principle 
 of the Missouri compromise, and to apply this 
 principle to the territories acquired from Mexico, 
 inasmuch as California !:as, by her constitution, 
 prohibited slavery, all Ixws which prevent its in 
 troduction in the residue of our Mexican territory 
 should be repealed by Congress. 
 
 The Compromise bill ot the Senate proposes to 
 admit California as a State into the Union, to or 
 ganize territorial governments for New Mexicoand 
 Uuh without the Wilmot proviso, and to settle the 
 disputed question of boundary between Texas and 
 N'i'-v Mexico, by giving to Texas a consideration in 
 money to relinquish her claim. With respect to 
 the admission or non-admission of slavery into 
 those Territories, it adopts the principle of non-in 
 tervention, leivn'g t.'ie hual u. ;-<'>it of that 
 tion to the people when they adopt constitutions 
 preparatory to their admission into the Union as 
 states. 
 
 If it be true that the laws of Mexico which abol 
 ished slavery in those Territories remain in force 
 until repealed, then by the provisions of the Com 
 promise bill slavery will be excluded from those 
 Territories during- the continuance of the territo 
 rial governments which it proposes to establish, for 
 it expressly inhibits the repeal of those laws. It 
 does not secure to the slaveholding 1 States what 
 most of their public men have claimed as their con 
 stitutional right. The people of the southern States 
 are not insulted by a direct enactment of the Wil 
 mot proviso, but for this forbearance they are re 
 quired to be content with a state of things which 
 as effectually excludes slavery from thoae Territo 
 ries as if the bill contained the proviso in express 
 terms. 
 
 The difficulty of devising measures of legislation 
 suited to the condition of the Territories which we 
 have acquired, and acceptable to the people of the 
 different sections of the Union, results, in my opin 
 ion, chiefly from the extreme zeal, violence, and 
 passion, with which erroneous opinions have been 
 inculcated, by political partisans, in the non-slave- 
 holding and slaveholding Spates of the Union. 
 There is a struggle between these two classes of 
 States for political power. At present, the Union 
 consists of thirty Stales, in one- half of which slavery 
 exists; and each State being entitled by the Con 
 stitution to two Senators, there is, therefore, in the 
 Senate an exact balance of power between the 
 slaveholding and the non-slaveholding States. The 
 territory which we have acquired from Mexico is 
 sufficient in extent to form, "when it shall be peo 
 pled, several new States; and as these shall be 
 slave States or free States, so will the preponder 
 ance of political power be determined in this gov 
 ernment. And this I apprehend is the true source 
 of the sectional controversy that now afflicts the 
 country. In the North the opinion has been con 
 stantly propagated that prohibitory legislation was 
 necessary to prevent the extension of slavery and 
 the formation of additional slave States; while in 
 the South it has been urged with equal zeal that 
 such indeed would be the result, but for the obsta 
 cles interposed bv northern agitation arid the threat 
 of hostile legislation. 
 
 In my opinion, causes which exist and which 
 legislation cannot change make it impossible for 
 slavery to obtain a permanent foothold in the Ter 
 ritories acquired from Mexico. The character and 
 sentiments of the people who now inhabit them, 
 and who are likely to emigrate thither the char 
 acter of the country, its soil and climate, all con 
 spire to make such a result impossible. A recog 
 nition and candid admission of this truth by the 
 North and the South would, it seems to me, mode 
 rate the irrational excitement which exists on this 
 subject in both sections, and remove one of the 
 principal causes that now embarrass this Govern 
 ment and disturb the public tranquillity. 
 
 When I say that slavery will be forever excluded 
 from the Territories which we have acquired from 
 Mexico, by causes that exist independent of Con 
 gressional ie^i-lation. I am only repeating an opin 
 ion which has heretofore been expressed by the late 
 Secretary of the Treasury, Mr R.J.Walker; by Mr. 
 Caes, in hi? Nicholson letter; by the late Secretary of 
 State, Mr. Buchanan; and by Mr. Webster, in his 
 recent great speech in the Senate; and I think I 
 am safe in saying, that I am only uttering a truth 
 which every intelligent, man in this republic be 
 lieves, who has examined the subject with the pur 
 pose of arriving at correct conclusions. I arn sup 
 ported in this opinion, also, by the Committee of 
 Thirteen which reported the Compromise bill, as 
 the following extract from the report accompa 
 nying that bfll will show : 
 
 "Ihe bill for establishing the two Territories, it 
 will be observed, omits the Wilmot proviso on the 
 
one hand, and, on {he other, makes no provision 
 for the introduction of slavery into any part of the 
 new Territories. That proviso has been the fruit 
 ful source of distraction and Agitation. If it were 
 adopted and applied to any Territory, it would 
 cease to have any obligatory force as soon as such 
 Territory were admitted as a State in the Union. 
 There was never any occasion for it, to accomplish 
 the professed object with which it was originally 
 offered. This has been clearly demonstrated by 
 the current of events. Cal fornia, of all the recent 
 territorial acquisitions from Mexico, was that in 
 which, if anywhere within them, the introduction 
 of slavery was most likely to take place; and the " 
 constitution of California, by the unanimous vote 
 of her convention, has expressly interdicted it. 
 There is the .highest degree of probability that 
 Utah and New Mexico will, when they come to be 
 admitted as States, follow the example." 
 
 Mr. Chairman, if I have succeeded in establish 
 ing the positions I have assumed, in any degree 
 proportionate to my own deep conviction of their 
 truth, the conclusion will follow, that in deciding- 
 the comparative merits of the several measures 
 now under consideration in this and the other end 
 of the Capitol, we ought to be governed, not ex 
 clusively by our individual opinions 01 the specific 
 provisions of those measures, but that our estimate 
 of their adaptation as remedies for existing evils 
 ought to be in a great degree influenced by the fa 
 vor and support extended to them by the Repre 
 sentatives of conflicting sentiments and opinions. 
 When the various matters in controversy be 
 tween the northern and southern sections of the 
 Union were referred by the Senate to a committee, 
 composed of Senators eminent, for talents and pa 
 triotism, and selected, in equal numbers, from the 
 two great political parties, and from the slavehold- 
 ing and non-slaveholding States, the hope naturally 
 arose in the public mind, that the high character of 
 that committee would impart an influence to its re 
 commendations that would take these questions out 
 of the vortex of party politics, and commend its 
 recommendations to the general acceptance and 
 approval of the whole country. This expectation 
 has not been realized. Since the report of the com 
 mittee the Senate itself has been converted into a 
 scene of discord an arena of sectional strife. 
 Southern Senators oppose the report of the commit 
 tee because it yields every thing in controversy to 
 the North, and, on the other hand, northern Sena 
 tors oppose it because it yields every thing in con 
 troversy to the South. Its supporters in the South 
 obviously intend to assume that it secures the ad 
 mission of slavery into the Territories acquired 
 from Mexico, whilst it is equally obvious that its 
 northern supporters will assume that it excludes 
 slavery from those Territories. Can a measure 
 susceptible of such contradictory construction tran- 
 quilize the public mind, and restore harmony to the 
 Union ? If it be passed into a law by Congress, is 
 it not to be feared that the same conflict of opinion 
 which has marked the debate in the S<nate will be 
 transferred to the popular forum, in the North and 
 South ; and that protracted agitation, and deeper 
 and more dangerous sectional excitements, will be 
 the consequence ? In the midst of this conflict of 
 opinion, it now hangs suspended in the Senate no 
 man claiming to be able to foretell its fate. Should 
 it receive such modifications as to make it pass the 
 Senate, is it not to be apprehended that, when it ' 
 comes into this Hall, it will encounter the same 
 fate which every attempt heretofore made to estab 
 lish territorial governments for our Mexican terri 
 tories has encountered? Will not some ardent 
 " Free-soiler" rise in. his place, and move to 
 amend, by attaching the Wilrnot proviso, pro 
 hibiting slavery in those Territories? And will 
 not that proposition, as heretofore, command a 
 
 majority of votes in this House, and will not 
 increased sectional exasperation and excitement 
 follow as a consequence ? It was undoubtedly well- 
 founded apprehensions of this kind, that induced 
 the President to recommend Congress to confine 
 its action, for the. present, to the admission of Cali 
 fornia into the Union as a State, and leave the resi 
 due of territory to the government of existing 1 laws 
 and the temporary governments which ha.ve been 
 established. 
 
 This recommendation of the President contem 
 plates the early admission of New Mexico, as a 
 State into the Union, and refers the question of the 
 existence or non-existence of slavery therein to the 
 decision of the people, when they form a State con 
 stitution, preparatory to their application for ad 
 mission. He recommends the North to waive the 
 proviso, so offensive to the South, and he recom 
 mends the South and the North mutually to con 
 sent to a reference of the question in dispute be 
 tween them to the decision of that tribunal which, 
 in the last resort, must have jurisdiction, whatever 
 plan of temporary adjustment may be adopted by 
 Congress. He recommends a "compromise" which 
 gives a triumph neither to the one section nor the 
 other, and which requires neither section to sacri 
 fice its principles, its pride, or its rights. The fact 
 having been developed by repeated unsuccessful 
 attempts, that Congress cannot, by any act of legis 
 lation, adjust the question in dispute to the satis 
 faction of the parties to that dispute, the President 
 recommends them to refer its decision to that great 
 American principle which recognises the right of 
 every political community to choose and decide for 
 itself what shall be the character of its institutions 
 and laws. 
 
 But it is urged that there were irregularities, in 
 formalities, departures from established usages, in 
 the proceedings in California, which resulted in the 
 formation of a State constitution and an applica 
 tion for admission into the Union, that constitute 
 sufficient grounds for rejecting her application. 
 These objections are so trivial that I will not waste 
 time in refuting them. No one entertains the ex 
 pectation that California will be remanded info a 
 territorial condition, and the question of her a'd mis 
 sion is merely a question of time. It may be de 
 layed, but cannot and ought not to be prevented. 
 More plausible objections are urged against the 
 early admission of New Mexico into the Union as a 
 State; one of which is, that the population, unac 
 customed to self-government, is not sufficiently 
 civilized and intelligent to comprehend and perform 
 the duties that would attach to them as a State. I 
 admit the force of this objection, and frankly de 
 clare that, but for the peculiar circumstances under 
 which we are to act, 1 would be in favor of holding 
 New Mexico to a long period of territorial pupil 
 age, before admitting her as a State into the Union; 
 but wnen we compare the evils which may result 
 from her admission as a State with those likely to 
 flow from a prolongation of present difficulties, 
 they sink into insignificance. Gentlemen from the 
 slavehokling States found their opposition to the 
 early admission of New Mexico upon the assump 
 tion that the sentiments and opinions of that people 
 are sufficiently known to make it certain that they 
 will incorporate a prohibition of slavery into their 
 constitution. 
 
 Admitting the truth of this assumption, it does 
 not constitute a sufficient reason for rejecting the 
 policy which I am advocating. I have already ex 
 pressed the opinion that the same result would ul 
 timately obtain, whatever may be the legislation of 
 Congress; and a brief postponement of that result 
 would not compensate for the evils likely to flow 
 from a continuation of the strife and agitation 
 which now distracts the country. And, as the peo 
 ple, when in convention to form a State constitu- 
 
tion, can alone finally decide the question which is 
 the cause of that strife and agitation, every consid 
 eration of policy, having 1 reference to the harmony 
 and stability of the Union, urg-es most powerfully 
 its immediate reference to them. Let the peoole of 
 New Mexico decide the question to suit themselves, 
 and whatever their decision may be, the people of 
 the United States will acquiesce. If they adopt a 
 constitution prohibiting- slavery, what right will 
 the southern States have to complain? If they adopt 
 a constitution which establishes slavery, what right 
 will the northern States have to complain? The 
 North and the South will recognise the right of 
 New Mexico to deride conformably to her own 
 convictions; and whether that decision shall accord 
 with the preference of the one or the other section, 
 they will acquiesce; and their patriotism will sig 
 nally rebuke any attempt, by those who are hostile 
 to the Union and seek its destruction, to make the 
 decision of New Mexico, on this subject, conducive 
 to the accomplishment of their traitorous purposes. 
 It ifi a feature in the plan of adjustment recom 
 mended by the President, which more than any 
 thing 1 else commends it to my support, that it set 
 tles, by the only mode practicable, finally and for 
 ever, this unhappy controversy between the North 
 and the South, and puts an end to sectional agita 
 tion on that subject. 
 
 Having expressed my approval of the policy re 
 commended by the President. I feel myself called 
 upon to.answer another objection urged against it; 
 which is, that by its adoption the United States 
 would fail to redeem the obligations incurred by 
 the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The ninth sec 
 tion of that treaty provides that 
 
 "Mexican^who, in the Territories aforesaid, 
 shall not preW've the character of citizens of the 
 Mexican republic, conformably with what is stipu 
 lated in the preceding article, SHALL BE INCOHPO- 
 
 RATED INTO THE UNION OF THE UfclTED STATES, 
 
 and be admitted at I lie proper time (to be judged of 
 by the Congress of the United States) to the enjoy 
 ment of all the rights of citizens of the United Slates, 
 according to the principles of the Constitution, and in 
 the mean time shall be maintained and protected 
 in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, 
 and secured in the free exercise of their religion, 
 without restriction. 
 
 Now, I think it is a manifest truth, that the poli 
 cy recommended by the President to admit Califor 
 nia as a State immediately, and New Mexico at an 
 early day, more fully and completely redeems our 
 treaty obligations, with respect to those Territories, 
 than any which has been suggested. But it is 
 contended that this policy leaves the people of those 
 Territories, during the time preceding their admis 
 sion into the Union as States, subject to the tyran 
 ny of military government; and that it is, there 
 fore, repugnant to American ideas of liberty. 
 Surely th' se who urge this objection have not read 
 th official documents which have been communi 
 cated to Congress, and laid upon our tables. It 
 was the boast of Mr. Polk's administration that it 
 had, while 4he war with Mexico was yet raging, 
 waived the rights of conquest, as defined by the law 
 of nations, and generously given to Cahiornia and 
 New Mexico civil governments, instead of subject 
 ing them to the rigors of military law. 
 
 Nothing like military government exists in either 
 of those Territories. The military arm of the Uni 
 ted States is there to protect, not to rule. Tht; Sec 
 retary of War, in his annual report, referring to the 
 delicate duties imposed upon the army by the pe 
 culiar state of things existing in California and 
 New Mexico, says, "one of its assigned duties is to 
 aid civil functionaries, when required, in the pres 
 ervation of public tranquillity;" and, in a commu 
 nication addressed to General Reily, acting civil 
 
 governor of California, dated June 26, 1849, he 
 says: 
 
 "It is equally true that all laws existing and of 
 force in California at the period of the conquer, are 
 still operative-, with the limitation that they are not 
 repugnant to*the Constitution and laws of the Uni 
 ted States. In my opinion these constitute the 
 whole code of laws now of force in California. I 
 should add, that thia opinion does not infringe on 
 the right of communities to make necessary regu 
 lations for the police and security of persons and 
 property. Such regulations must necessarily be 
 temporary, as they are presumed to be voluntary, 
 and designed to meet emergencies and difficulties 
 which the sovereign power will take the earliest oc 
 casion to remove." 
 
 General Reily, writing to the Secretary of War, 
 under date of August 30th, 1849, says: 
 
 "Before leaving Monterey, I heard numerous ru 
 mors of irregularities and crimes among those work 
 ing in the placers; but, on visiting the mining re 
 gions, I was agreeably surprised to learn that every 
 thing was quite the reverse from what had been 
 represented, and that order and regularity were 
 preserved throughout almost the entire extent of 
 the mineral districts. In each little settlement or 
 tented town, the miners have elected their local al 
 caldes and constables, whose judicial decisions and 
 official acts are sustained by the people, and en 
 forced with much regularity and energy." 
 
 Colonel Washington, as acting governor of New 
 Mexico, writes to Mr. Marcy, Secretary of War, 
 under date of November 8, 1843, as follows: 
 
 "The system of government now in force in New 
 Mexico is that which was established in 1846, and 
 embraces what is commonly termed Kearny's 
 code, to which the people, through their representatives 
 lately assembled in convention, have happily expi'essed 
 their assent, as will be seen by their memorial to Con 
 gress, and is considered adiquate to the wants of the 
 country until another can be provided." 
 
 These extracts, from official documents, conclu 
 sively show that our Mexican Territories are not 
 subject to military government in the obnoxious 
 sense of that term. Pre-existing laws have not 
 been superseded by martial law; judicial tribunals 
 have not been rfupersedeci by courts martial. General 
 Reily describes "each little settlement or tented 
 town" as a miniature democracy, making laws 
 adapted to its condition, and administering them 
 by agents chosen by the people; thus giving pro 
 tection and security to " life, liberty, and happi 
 ness," and gloriously illustrating the capacity of 
 man to enjoy and exercise the great right of self- 
 government. Although it is true that the duties of 
 civil governor of New Mexico have bf.en devolved 
 upon a military officer, it does not follow, as a con- 
 si quence, that the people of that Territory are sub 
 ject to a military government. It would be quite as 
 logical to conclude that the people of the United 
 States are subject to a military government, be-" 
 cause the Chief Magistrate of the Republic is also 
 commander in-chief of its army and navy. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, let California be admitted into 
 the Union, and the cause which distracts the na 
 tional councils will be vastly diminished in magni 
 tude, and the public mind will tranquilize in a cor 
 responding degree; and thereupon a state of senti 
 ment and opinion in the country will ensue, which 
 will enable Congress to adopt such measures, with 
 respect to the residue of the territory acquired from 
 Mexico as may be necessary and proper, without 
 the apprehension of dangerous excitements and 
 convulsions in the Union. But though J believe 
 the legislation recommended by the President to 
 be the safest and wisest for the country, all things 
 considered, yet it is not my purpose obstinately to 
 withhold my support from any other plan of ad 
 justment which, repudiating the Wiunot proviso^ 
 
8 
 
 offensive to the people I represent, can command 
 such confidence and support from the representa 
 tives of northern and southern sentiment and opin 
 ion, as to inspire a reasonable confidence in its ca 
 pacity to put an end to sectional agitation, and re 
 store harmony and fraternal feeling to the States of 
 this Union. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, when the combination of causes 
 which have prevented the recommendation of the 
 President from receiving a fair and just considera 
 tion in the two Houses of Congress shall be fully 
 comprehended, the mists which now dim the public 
 vision will dissipate, and it will be seen and admit 
 ted that it is a recomendation founded in a wise ap 
 preciation of the difficulties that surround the sub 
 ject a recommendation worthy of one whose deeds, 
 under the flag of his country, have carried its mil 
 itary glory to the farthest confines of civilization, 
 and whose patriotism, bounded by no sectioned lines, 
 is co-extensive with the limits of that great Re 
 public, which, justly appreciating his merit, has 
 made him its Chief Magistrate. And notwithstand 
 ing the extraordinary efforts that have been and 
 may be made, to force the adoption of some plan of 
 adjustment differing from that recommended by 
 the Pi 'side tit, yet it is by no means certain that 
 these efforts may not be defeated by the same 
 causes that have hitherto proved fatal to legislation 
 on this subject. Aside from the fact, admitted by 
 all, that a large majority of Congress are in favor 
 of admitting California as a State into the Union, 
 nothing is settled, nothing is known, nothing can 
 be foretold; and it may so happen that the question 
 will at last be narrowed down to the admission or 
 non-admission of that State. 
 
 At an early period of the session, the honorable 
 gentleman from North Carolina, (Mr. CLING- 
 MAN,) anticipating this as a possible occurrence, 
 threatened that the minority would, in such event, 
 defeat that measure by demanding the ayes and 
 noes on motions to adjourn, and motions for calls 
 of the House, and, by constantly alternating and re 
 peating- these motions, consume the entire session 
 of Congress, preventing- thereby, not only the ad 
 mission of California, but also the passing of those 
 appropriation bills indispensably necessary to 
 carry on the Government. And the honorable 
 gentleman very distinctly intimated that, to ac 
 complish this object, as a last resort, a Bowie-knife 
 tragedy might be enacted on this floor, reducing 
 the members of this House to a number below a 
 constitutional quorum. This would be rebellion in 
 its worst form a factious attempt by a minority 
 of Congress to usurp that control over legislation 
 which the Constitution confers upon a majority. 
 Should the contemplated contingency arise, I trust 
 the majority of this House will not be frightened 
 from its propriety by this offensive appeal to its 
 fears, but that it will maintain its constitutional 
 right to control legislation with calmness, dignity, 
 and firmness ; and ^avoiding all disorderly and un 
 becoming- exhibitions of excitement, it will, ii 
 needful, adjourn from day to day, even to the end 
 of the session, that public opinion and the ballot- 
 box may come to the rescue, and properly rebuke 
 so daring and reckless an assault upon the funda 
 mental principle of republican government. But I 
 trust no such necessity will arise. I have respected 
 and esteemed the honorable gentleman from North 
 Carolina so much, that I cannot otherwise regard 
 his declarations than as an ebullition of excited 
 feeling, rather than evidence of a settled purpose. 
 I am sure that his self-respect and his love of coun 
 try will make it impossible for him to attempt the 
 execution of a threat, made in the heat of debate, 
 and uiidanctioned, I hope, by his subsequent calmer 
 reflections. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, we are so constituted that we of 
 ten resist the conviction and admission of unpalata 
 
 ble truths, even when they stand revealed to our 
 mental vision in unmistakable reality. The equi 
 librium of political power, which has heretofore 
 been maintained between the slaveholding and 
 non-slaveholding States of the Union, will present 
 ly be a fact "consigned to the receptacle of things 
 lost upon earth;" and the preponderance of politi 
 cal power under this Government will pass, never 
 to be regained, to the non-slaveholding States. Jn 
 my judgment, the best interests of this Republic 
 require, that this truth should be frankly declared* 
 by public men, and recognised by the people. It- 
 is a truth which raises a question the gravest and 
 most important that any people were ever called 
 upon to consider and decide. That question is, 
 Shall the Union be maintained or dissolved? Is it 
 wiser for the southern States to quietly acquiesce 
 in this inevitable transfer of political power to the 
 northern States, and trust for their safety and the 
 security of their property to the justice and patriot 
 ism of their co-States, and the guaranties of the 
 Constitution, "or to take arms against a sea" of 
 apprehended dangers, and, by dissolving the Union, 
 seek security and safety in the organization of a 
 southern confederacy? "To this complexion it 
 mu.": last." This is even no iv the real 
 
 lion. I have, in a preceding part of my remarks, 
 endeavored to show what and whose policy has 
 destroyed that equilibrium of power, the destruc 
 tion of which now creates so much anxiety in the 
 slaveholding States; and it is needless for me to re 
 peat what I nave already said upon that subject. I 
 submit to the results of a policy, the consequences 
 of which I foresaw, and which I labored in vain to 
 defeat. I will trust to the guaranties of the Con 
 stitution, and to the justice and patriotism of those 
 who are henceforth to wield the^jower which it 
 confers. Not until this reliance fan, will I permit 
 myself to look to a dissolution of the Union as a 
 remedy for existing evils, or those which are ap 
 prehended. *I am a citizen of a slaveholding 
 State I am the representative 'of a slaveholding 
 constituency and come what may, in connexion 
 with this subject, their fate shall be my fate, their 
 destiny my destiny. Identified with them, and 
 bound to them by all ties that are sacred and 
 strong, I declare it as my opinion that, while the 
 happiness, welfare, and liberty of all the States are 
 involved in the maintenance of the Union, the 
 southern States are pre-eminently interested in its 
 preservation. And if my voice could reach the 
 slave-owners of the South, I would tell them that 
 the Union is the only effective safeguard for the 
 security of that peculiar property with regard to 
 which they are now so anxious; and, if I could, I 
 would proclaim to them, "in a voice of sevenfold 
 thunder," that those are practically their worst ene 
 mies who counsel them to any course of action whit it 
 tends to its destruction. --.- - - '- '- Y ; J ; 
 
 Mr. Chairman, it must be a source of happiness 
 to every man who ( loves his country to perceive 
 that, although speeches of a sectional and inflam 
 matory character have been for six months sent 
 forth Irom this Capitol, and scattered broadcast 
 over the land, their effect seems to have been to 
 tranquilize rather than excite the public mind. The 
 people pause, as well they may, when, the vortex of 
 disunion and civil war is opened to their view. 
 They refuse to volunteer or be impressed into the 
 service of disunionists. They will not enlist under 
 that banner. They will not march to that music. 
 They have given unmistakable evidence that they 
 are devoted to the Constitution of their country, and 
 that they are determined to sustain and uphold the 
 Government bequeathed to them by their ancestors, 
 and make it, in all time to come, what it has been 
 in time past the beacon light of liberty, guiding 
 the nations of the earth to political redemption, as 
 the star of Bethlehem guided to the Redeemer.