the people of each will have instituted for themselves a republican form of government, laying its foundation in such principles, and organizing its power in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

By awaiting their action, all causes of uneasiness may be avoided. and confidence and kind feeling preserved. With a view of maintaining the harmony and tranquillity so dear to all, we should abstain from the introduction of those exciting topics of a sectional character which have hitherto produced painful apprehensions in the public mind; and I repeat the solemn warning of the first and most illustrious of my predecessors, against furnishing any ground for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations."

Jan. 4th.-Gen. Sam. Houston of Texas submitted to the Senate the following proposition:

"Whereas, The Congress of the United States, possessing only a delegated authority, have no power over the subject of Negro Slavery within the limits of the United States, either to prohibit or interfere with it, in the States, Territories, or District, where, by municipal law, it now existe, or to establish it in any State or Territory where it does not exist; but, as an assurance and gua rantee to promote harmony, quiet apprehension, and remove sectional prejudice, which by possibility might impair or weaken love and devotion to the Union in any part of the country, it is hereby

Resolved, That, as the people in Territories have the same inherent rights of self-government as the people in the States, if, in the exercise of such inherent rights, the people in the newlyacquired Territories, by the Annexation of Texas and the acquisition of California and New-Mexico, south of the parallel of 36 degrees and 30 minutes of north latitude, extending to the Pacific Ocean, shall establish Negro Slavery in the formation of their state governments, it shall be deemed no objection to their admission as a State or States into the Union, in accordance with the Constitution of the United States."

Jan. 21st.—Gen. Taylor, in answer to a resolution of inquiry, sent a message to the House, stating that he had urged the formation of State Governments in California and New-Mexico. He adds:

"In advising an early application by the people of these Territories for admission as States, I was actuated principally by an earnest desire to afford to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress the opportunity of avoiding occasions of bitter and angry discussions among the people

of the United States.

length, which may elapse before the admission of the Territories ceded by Mexico, as States, it appears probable that similar excitement will prevail to an undue extent.

"Under these circumstances, I thought, and still think, that it was my duty to endeavor to put it in the power of Congress, by the admission of California and New-Mexico as States, to remove all occasion for the unnecessary agitation of the public mind.

"It is understood that the people of the Western part of California have formed the plan of a State Constitution, and will soon submit the same to the judgment of Congress, and apply for admis. sion as a State. This course on their part, though in accordance with, was not adopted exclusively in consequence of, any expression of my wishes, been promoted by officers sent there by my preinasmuch as measures tending to this end had decessor, and were already in active progress of execution, before any communication from me reached California. If the proposed constitution shall, when submitted to Congress, be found to be in compliance with the requisitions of the Constitution of the United States, I earnestly recommend that it may receive the sanction of Congress."

He adds

"Should Congress, when California shall present herself for incorporation into the Union, annex a condition to her admission as a State affecting her domestic institutions contrary to the wishes of her people, and even compel her temporarily to comply with it, yet the State could change her constitution at any time after admission, when to her it should seem expedient. Any attempt to deny to the people of the State the right of self-government, in a matter which peculiarly affects themselves, will infallibly be regarded by them as an invasion of their rights; and, upon the principles laid down in our own Declaration of Independence, they will certainly be sustained by the great mass of the American people. To assert that they are a conquered people, and must, as a State, submit to the will of their conquerors, in this regard, will meet with no cordial response among American freemen. Great numbers of them are native citizens of the United States, and not inferior to the rest of our countrymen in intelligence and patriotism; and no language of menace to restrain them in the exercise of an undoubted right, substantially guarantied to them by the treaty of cession itself, shall ever be uttered by me, or encouraged and sustained by persons acting under my authority. It is to be expected that, in the residue of the territory ceded to us by Mexico, the people residing there will, at the time of their incorporation into the Union as a State, settle all questions of domestic policy to

suit themselves."

Jan. 29th, 1850.-Mr. Henry Clay of Ky. submitted to the Senate the following propositions, which were made a special order and printed:

"Under the Constitution, every State has the Feb. 13, 1850.-Gen. Taylor communiright to establish, and, from time to time, alter its municipal laws and domestic institutions, in-cated to Congress the Constitution (free) of dependently of every other State and of the the State of California. General Government, subject only to the prohibitions and guarantees expressly set forth in the Constitution of the United States. The subjects thus left exclusively to the respective States, were not designed or expected to become topics of National agitation. Still as, under the Constitution, Congress has power to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territories of the United States, every new acquisition of territory has led to discussions on the question whether the system of involuntary servitude, which prevails in many of the States, should or should not be prohibited in that Territory. The periods of excitement from this cause, which have heretofore occurred, have been safely passed; but, during the interval, of whatever

"1. Resolved, That California, with suitable boundaries, ought, upon her application, to be admitted as one of the States of this Union, without the imposition by Congress of any restriction in respect to the exclusion or introduction of Slavery within those boundaries.

"2. Resolved, That as Slavery does not exist by law, and is not likely to be introduced into any of the territory acquired by the United States from the Republic of Mexico, it is inexpedient for Congress to provide by law either for its introduction into,

"5. Resolved, That all the territory ceded to | by his slave-property, and to enjoy the same the United States, by the Treaty of Guadaloupe therein, free from all molestation or hindrance Hidalgo, lying west of said Territory of New- whatsoever. Mexico, and east of the contemplated new State 3. Whether Slavery is or is not likely to be of California, for the present, constitute one Ter-introduced into these territories, or into any of ritory, and for which some form of government suitable to the condition of the inhabitants be provided, without any restriction as to Slavery.

it."

Mr. Clay in reply said:

States at the last session; combated and dis- | anty or counteracting measure is connected with proved, as I thought, by gentlemen from the slave holding States, and which the Compromise bill was framed to test. So far, I regarded the question of law as disposed of, and it was very clearly and satisfactorily shown to be against the spirit of the resolution of the Senator from Kentucky. If the contrary is true, I presume the Senator from Kentucky would declare that if a law is now valid in the Territories abolishing Slavery, that it could not be introduced there, even if a law was passed creating the institution, or repealing the statutes already existing; a doctrine never assented to, so far as I know, until now, by any Senator representing one of the slaveholding States. Sir, I hold the very opposite, and with such confidence, that at the last session I was willing and did vote for a bill to test this question in the Supreme Court. Yet this resolution assumes the other doctrine to be true, and our assent is challenged to it as a proposition of law.

"I do not mean to detain the Senate by any discussion; but I deemed it to be my duty to enter a decided protest, on the part of Virginia, against such doctrines. They concede the whole question at once, that our people shall not go into the new Territories and take their property with them; a doctrine to which I never will assent, and for which, sir, no law can be found. There are other portions of the resolutions, for which, if they could be separated, I should be very willing to vote. That respecting fugitive slaves, and that respecting the organization of governments in these Territories, I should be willing to vote for; and I am happy to declare the gratification I experience at finding the Senator from Kentucky differing so much, on this subject, from the Executive message recently laid before the Senate. I beg not to be understood as having spoken in any spirit of unkindness towards the Senator from Kentucky, for whom I entertain the warmest and most profound respect but I cannot but express also my regret that he has felt it to be his duty, standing as he does before this people, and representing the people he does, to introduce into this body resolutions of this kind."

Mr. Jefferson Davis of Miss. (since and now Secretary of War) objected specially to so much of Mr. Clay's propositions as relates to the boundary of Texas, to the Slave-trade in the Federal district, and to Mr. Clay's avowal in his speech that he did not believe Slavery ever would or could be established in any part of the territories acquired from Mexico. He continued:

But, sir, we are called upon to receive this as a measure of compromise! As a measure in which we of the minority are to receive nothing. A measure of compromise! I look upon it as but a modest mode of taking that, the claim to which has been more boldly asserted by others; and, that I may be understood upon this question, and that my position may go forth to the country in the same columns that convey the sentiments of the Senator from Kentucky, I here assert, that never will I take less than the Missouri Compromise line extended to the Pacific ocean, with the specific recognition of the right to hold slaves in the territory below that line; and that, before such territories are admitted into the Union as States, elaves may be taken there from any of the United States at the option of the owners. I can never consent to give additional power to a majority to commit further aggressions upon the minority in this Union; and will never consent to any proposition which will have such a tendency, without a full guar

"I am extremely sorry to hear the Senator from Mississippi say that he requires, first, the extension of the Missouri Compromise line to the Pacific; and also that he is not satisfied with that, but requires, if I understood him correctly, a positive provision for the admission of Slavery south of that line. And now, sir, coming from a Slave State, as I do, I owe it to myself, I owe it to truth, I owe it to the subject, to state that no earthly power could induce me to vote for a specific measure for the introduction of Slavery where it had not before existed, either south or north of that line. Coming as I do from a Slave State, is my solemn, deliberate, and well-matured determination that no power-no earthly power-shall compel me to vote for the positive introduction of Slavery either south or north of that line. Sir, while you reproach, and justly, too, our British ancestors for the introduction of this institution upon the continent of America, I am, for one, unwilling that the posterity of the present inhabitants of California and of NewMexico shall reproach us for doing just what we reproach Great Britain for doing to us. If the citizens of those Territories choose to establish Slavery, I am for admitting them with such provisions in their constitutions; but then, it will be their own work, and not ours, and their posterity will have to reproach them, and not us, for forming constitutions allowing the institution of Slavery to exist among them. These are my views, sir, and I choose to express them; and I care not how extensively and universally they are known. The honorable Senator from Virginia has expressed his opinion that Slavery exists in these Territories, and I have no doubt that opinion is sincerely and honestly entertained by him; and I would say with equal sincerity and honesty, that I believe that Slavery nowhere exists within any portion of the Territory acquired by us from Mexico. He holds a directly contrary opinion to mine, as he has a perfect right to do; and we will not quarrel about that difference of opinion."

Mr. William R. King of Ala. was inclined to look with favor on Mr. Clay's propositions, and assented to some of them; but he objected to the mode in which California had formed what is called a State Constitution. He preferred the good old way of first organizing Territories, and so training up their people "for the exercise and enjoyment of our institutions." Besides, he thought "there was not that kind of population there that justified the formation of a State Government." On the question of Slavery in the new Territories, he said:

"With regard to the opinions of honorable Senators, respecting the operation of the laws of Mexico in our newly-acquired territories, there may be, and no doubt is, an honest difference of opinion with regard to that matter. Some believe that the municipal institutions of Mexico overrule the provisions of our Constitution, and prevent us from carrying our slaves there. That is a matter which I do not propose to discuss; it has been discussed at length in the debate upon the Compromise bill, putting it on the ground of a judicial decision. Sir, I know not-nor is it a matter of much importance with me-whether that which the honorable Senator states to be a fact, and which, as has been remarked by the Senator from Mississippi, can only be conjectural,

be in reality so or not-that Slavery never can go than this: That California is already disposed of there. This is what is stated, however. Well, having formed a State Constitution, and tha. be it so. If slave labor be not profitable there, Territorial Governments shall be organized for it will not go there; or, if it go, who will be Deseret and New-Mexico, under which, by the benefited? Not the South. They will never operation of laws already existing, a slaveholdcompel it to go there. We are misunderstood-ing population could not carry with them, or own grossly, I may say-by honorable Senators, slaves there. What is there in the nature of a though not intentionally; but we are contending compromise here, coupled, as it is, with the profor a principle, and a great principle-a principle position that, by the existing laws in the Terrilying at the very foundation of our constitutional tories, it is almost certain that slaveholders canrights-involving, as has been remarked, our not, and have no right to, go there with their property; in one word, involving our safety, our property? What is there in the nature of a comhonor, all that is dear to us, as American free- promise here? I am willing, however, to run the men. Well, sir, for that principle we will be com- risks, and am ready to give to the Territories the pelled to contend to the utmost, and to resist ag- governments they require. I shall always think gression at every hazard and at every sacrifice. that, under a constitution giving equal rights to That is the position in which we are placed. We all parties, the slaveholding people, as such, can ask no act of Congress-as has been properly in- go to these Territories, and retain their property timated by the Senator from Mississippi-to carry there. But, if we adopt this proposition of the Slavery anywhere. Sir, I believe we have as Senator from Kentucky, it is clearly on the basis much constitutional power to prohibit Slavery that Slavery shall not go there. from going into the territories of the United States, as we have to pass an act carrying Slavesippi (Mr. Davis) to maintain the proposition, ry there. We have no right to do either the one that the South asked or desired a law declaring or the other. I would as soon vote for the Wil- that Slavery should go there, or that it maintained mot Proviso as I would vote for any law which the policy even that it was the duty of Congress required that Slavery should go into any of the to pass such a law. We have only asked, and it Territories." is the only compromise to which we will submit, that Congress shall withhold the hand of violence from the Territories. The only way in which this question can be settled is, for gentlemen from the North to withdraw all their opposition to the Territorial Governments, and not insist on their Slavery Prohibition. The Union is then safe enough. Why, then, insist on a compromise, when those already made are sufficient for the peace of the North and South, if faithfully observed? These propositions are in the name of a compromise, when none is necessary."

Mr. Downs of Louisiana said:

"I do not understand the Senator from Missis

The debate having engrossed the attention of the Senate for nearly two months

March 25th.-Mr. Douglas, from the Committee on Territories, reported the following bills:

Senate, 169.-A bill for the admission of California into the Union.

"I must confess that, in the whole course of my life, my astonishment has never been greater than it was when I saw this [Mr. Clay's] proposition brought forward as a compromise; and rise now, sir, not for the purpose of discussing it at all, but to protest most solemnly against it. I consider this compromise as no compromise at all. What, sir, does it grant to the South? I can see nothing at all. The first resolution offer ed by the honorable Senator proposes to admit the State of California with a provision prohibiting Slavery in territory which embraces all our possessions on the Pacific. It is true, there may be a new regulation of the boundary hereafter; but, if there were to be such a regulation, why was it not embraced in this resolution? Ás no boundary is mentioned, we have a right to presume that the boundary established by the Constitution of California was to be received as the established boundary. What concession, then, is it from the North, that we admit a State thus prohibiting Slavery, embracing the whole of our possessions on the Pacific coast, according to these resolutions? As to the resolution relating to New-Mexico and Deseret, if it had simply contained the provision that a constitutional government shall be established there, without any mention of Slavery whatever, it would have been well enough. But, inasmuch as it is affirmed that Slavery does not now exist in these Territories, April 15th.-The discussion of Mr. Clay's does it not absolutely preclude its admission there? and the resolutions might just as well resolutions still proceeding, Colonel Benton affirm that Slavery should be prohibited in these moved that the previous orders be postponed, Territories. The Senator from Alabama, if I un- and that the Senate now proceed to conderstood him aright, maintains that the proposi-sider the bill (S. 169) for the admission of tion is of the same import as the Wilmot Pro- the State of California. viso; and, in view of these facts, I would ask, is there anything conceded to us of the South?”

Mr. Butler of South Carolina said: "Perhaps our Northern brethren ought to understand that all the Compromises that have been made, have been by concessions-acknowledged concessions-on the part of the South. When other compromises are proposed, that require new concessions on their part, whilst none are exacted on the other, the issue, at least, should be presented for their consideration before they come to the decision of their great question. If I understand it, the Senator from Kentucky's whole proposition of compromise is nothing more

Senate, 170.-A bill to establish the Territorial Governments of Utah and New-Mexico, and for other purposes.

These bills were read, and passed to a second reading.

April 11th.-Mr. Douglas moved that Mr. Bell's resolves do lie on the table. Lost: Yeas 26; Nays 28.

Mr. Clay moved that this proposition do lie on the table. Carried: Yeas 27 (for a Compromise); Nays 24 (for a settlement without compromise).

solves aforesaid, when Mr. Benton moved The Senate now took up Mr. Bell's rethat they lie on the table. Lost: Yeas 24; Nays 28.

Mr. Benton next moved that they be so amended as not to connect or mix up the admission of California with any other question. Lost: Yeas 23; Nays 28.