;^^ vi^-^. 
 
 
 ^"- % 
 
 
 
 ^^^5 * -^ 
 
 0* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V* A 
 
 
 
<^ * O M O 
 
 
 %^' 
 
 A" ^tf> ♦-HP" V O. 
 
 
 -f 
 
 
 
 **'% '^^ 
 
 
 
 v„.*-' 
 
 ^^ ♦ N o ' -^ 
 
 >' \J'^^^V* "V^^V' \**^^'/ "'°, 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 U-- 
 
 JOHN MINOR BOTTS, 
 
 AT A DINNER 
 
 ( 
 
 AT POWHATAN COURT-HOUSE, VA., 
 
 JUNE 15, 1850. 
 
 {From the Richmond limes.] 
 Dinner by Whigs of Powhatan, at their Court House, on the 15th June, in compliment to the Hon. 
 JOiiN M. BOTTS, at which upwards of three hundred persons were present; among whom, a con- 
 siderable number of the Democratic party. The entertainment was such an one as might have been 
 expected from the hospitable citizens of the mo.-t enlightened people lo a favorite guest; the utmost 
 harmony and good cheer prevailed throughout. John M. Miller, Esq., presided, assisted by Mr. 
 ■Chastaine (Jocke, and others, acting as Vice Presidents. 
 The following regular toast was then given: 
 
 7th. Oar distinguished guest— Hon. John M. Bolts: By his dienified, manly, and consistent course, his olter disregard of 
 sell", and his devoiion to the principles of the pirty lo which he belongs, while he iias become a maityr to his cause, he has entitled 
 himself to the support of every true Whig in the District. 
 
 " His are faults wliich daring genius owes 
 Half tothe ardor which its birth bestows." 
 
 This toast having been received with great cordiality, Mr. BOTTS rose and responded to it, as follows: 
 
 Mr. Prksident and Gentlemen: I am duly sensible, Mr. President, of the many and lasting ob- 
 ligations that have been imposed upon me by my friends in the county of Powhatan. It is not alone 
 the courtesy and kindness that have been extended to me here to-day, nor the flattering sentiment, 
 which has been so well received, in regard to my past course, that command my earnest and heart-felt 
 acknowledgments; but the generous confidence which they have ever manifested since I first became in 
 any manner politically connected with them, entities them to my warmest gratitude. 
 
 It is true, a small portion of the V\ higs of this county complained of the course I felt it my right 
 and my duty to pursue in the last Presidential election; and in the exercise of their right, and what they 
 conceived to be their duty, they manifested their dissatisfaction at the polls. Of this I make no com- 
 plaint — for when I look back at the multiplicity of misrepresentations, falsehoods, and foul calumnies 
 that were circulated against me during that exciting period, my only surprise is, that I was able to com- 
 mand the vote I did, or, in other words, that so few of the masses of the people were misled by them. 
 
 When I first received the invitation to attend this Barbacue, which was tendered last fall, I saw fit, in 
 my reply, to speak with frankness, and some thought, with severity, of a portion of those who I con- 
 ceived had treated me with unkindness and harshness. If any portion of the people — I mean of the 
 masses of this district (not themselves aspirants) supposed, that in that letter, I intended to be personally 
 oflensive to them, they misunderstood i , and me I intended it only for a few, that I did not beiievo *<> 
 be entirelfi and exdusively patriotic and un.'^elfi=h in their opposition. Those for whom I did intend it, 
 understood it full well: in the most imsponsihk manner, they had indulged in harsh and unworthy 
 epithets against me in their African Church address; in the most responsible manner, I choose to reply 
 to it. 
 
 For the thousands of Whigs in this district, who have ever treated me with a kindness and confidence 
 that I often fear I may not have deserved, I shall always cherish a feeling of gratitude and regard; for 
 others who may have treated me with unkindness, I shall endeavor to remember them only to forget 
 their unkindness; but for those more prominent in the party — and for whom I intended that letter espe- 
 cially — I have nothing to repeat, nothing to add, and nothing to take back. They made the war; they 
 must be the first to propose peace; I am the challenged party, and it does not become me to propose a 
 settlement; I was the party first assailed, and I will not he the first to cry, "hold, enough!" I have, 
 therefore, no propositions to make, whatever my disposition might be to receive them. 
 
 Nor will I attempt here to vindicate my course in the last Presidential campaign, which I believe in 
 nearly twenty years of public service was the first occasion in which I had not given entire satislartion to 
 the party to which I belonged. No, sir; that vindication I leave to time, that great physician and 
 healer of all ditficuities and afflictions — that great exposerof all tliat is wicked, vicious, or corrupt — that 
 
 fllr : ^ ^si)) 
 
preat defender and vindicator of all that is true, virtuous, aud patriotic, to timf. I leave it, and time 
 will (if it has not already done so) establish the truth and correctness of all I s^id and did on that occa- 
 sion. It is not my nature, Mr. President, to look back, either to exult or lam«^t over the past; I prefer 
 to look to the present, and press on to the future; and with the present and the future, I propose, with your 
 permission, now to deal: and if you will extend to me your patience and indulgence, I will dismiss this 
 subject, and proceed to give you my views upon the general questions of national interest now presented 
 for the consideration of the public mind. ^ ., i 
 
 There are, sir, two parties in our country, distinct from all the rest, of whom I wish to say a word.^ 
 The one in 'the North called •' Abolitionists," and the other in the South, known as ' Disunionists." 
 I am not sure for which of the two parties I have the least sympathy or respect; and I am not sure to 
 which attaches the largest share of responsibility for the chief <iifficulties with which the nation has been 
 lately afflicted. . . 
 
 The abolitionists seem to estimate the value of this Union (and to hold, as a condition and a price lor 
 its continuance, ) by the aboliliou of African davtry. While the ultra men of the Soutii or disunionists, 
 seem to regard the perp-tuatinu and extension .if slavery as the chief bond that <an hold them and the 
 Union together. For neither of these parties have I any syriipathy. I held to the Union for far difler- 
 ent, and°i trust, higher and nobler purposes. It is for the p':rpctualion of American freedom, rather 
 than the abolition or perpetuation of African slavery. I am one of those who think slavery, in the ab- 
 stract, is much to be deprecated; and whilst I think that, as present organized in the Southern States, it is 
 a humanizing, civilizing, and christianizing institution, as all must agree who will take the pains tocompare 
 the present cwdition of our slaves with the original African race; yet I regard it as a great calamity that 
 it ever should have been entailed upon us; and I should look upon that man as the first and greatest 
 benefactor of his country, whose wisdom could point out to us some practical and satisfactory means by 
 which we could, throtigh our own instrumentabtv, and without interference from our neighbors, provide 
 for the ultimate emancipation and removal of all the slaves in the country. I speak of this as a desirable 
 thing, especially to the owners of slaves, who, I think, are the chief sufferers, but at the same time I fear 
 it is perfectly Utopian to attempt it; but I have seen too much difference between the enterprise, the in- 
 dustry, and the prosperity of the free and the slave States, to doubt the advantage we should derive from 
 it if it could be accomplished. 
 
 The discordant materials of which these t^vo parties, North and South, are composed, have led to an 
 agitation of the subject of slavery which has grown and increased year by year, until, at last, all have, 
 in a greater or less degree, been led to participate in the dissensions it has created. Th^ interests of the 
 country have been greatly interrupted— the business of the government has been retarded and neglected— 
 the Union itself, has been threatened with dissolution, and many wise men believed it was in danger. 
 I think much useless and unwise extravagance has been indulged in on both sides — that both parties 
 have run into extremes, and that the time has arrived for the people to act, and to act wisely; for each 
 party to correct the errors they have too hastily fallen into, and by restoring order to the distracted coun- 
 cils of the nation, give peace and quiet to the country. For one I am prepared to discharge my duty, 
 and my whole duty, let the consequences be to me, personally, what they may, and, accordingly I will 
 now proceed to give you my views upon this great bone of contention, the " V^ ilmot proviso," as it has 
 been more recently called, (to make it something more of a raw head and bloody bones, ) but which was 
 known as one of the main features of the ordinance of 1787; from that date down to about the year 
 1848, when a membei of Congress from Pennsylvania, named \\'ilmot, proposed to apply that portion 
 of the ordinance to any territory that might be acquired from Mexico, and thus it assumed the name of 
 the " Wilmot proviso." 
 
 I have given to this subject the most deliberate attention, and with the most anxious desire to bring 
 my mind to the conclusion, if I could, that Congress had no constitutional power to adopt it. It was 
 natural I should feel this desire, because it was, perhaps, to my interest as a public man to think not 
 only with you, but with nearly the whole f^outhcrn country; but at the same time I was in search after 
 tiuth, I was determined to arrive at it if I could; and I must say that the more I examined, the more I 
 was convinced that the power did exist, until, finally, every shadow of doubt has been removed from 
 my mind. I de not go into this argument now so much to establish the constitutionality of the \\' ilmot 
 proviso in which I feel no interest, as to vindicate my own position, often heretofore taken, and which 
 has been unjustly, and, sometimes, harshly assailed, and which I never before availed myself of an oc- 
 casion to defend; but if I can show that the power does exist, it may serve to reconcile some of those 
 who now oppose the Compromise, to its adoption. Let us look first to the action of Legislative, Execu- 
 tive, and Judicial departments of this Government from its earliest organization down to the year 1847, 
 running through a period of fifty eight years, and we will find an unbroken and irresistible chain of 
 authori"ly that it is useless and idle now to dispute; it carries with it too much weight for any or all of 
 
 u.q to resist. r l /-. 
 
 Fiist what has been the action of the Legislative and Executive Departments of the Crovemment' 
 In 1787, the Constitution was adopted in Convention; in the same year, the ordinance for the gov- 
 ernment of the territory northwest of the Ohio river, was adopted by the Congress of the Confederation, 
 which embraces the following article: 
 
 " There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes 
 wherec.r •; = nariv shall have been; .Inly convicted ; provided, always, that any person escaping into the same, troni wJiom labor 
 *r servii ;- is tawluMy claimed in 5ny one of the orisinal States, such ftigilive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the 
 pereoa ciauiiins his or her Labor or service as .^foresaid." 
 
Out of that territory northwest of the Ohio river, the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, 
 Wisconsin, and Iowa, have since been formed, and this 6th article of the ordinance or " Wilmot pro- 
 viso," as it is now called, has been attached to each in their territorial governments. 
 
 On the 7th of August, 1789, an act was passed by Congress, which was of course signed by General 
 Washington, to which the following preamble was affixed: 
 
 " Whereas, in order that the or<linance of ihe United Stales in Congress assembled for the governnnent of the territory north- 
 west of the river Ohio, may uontinne to have fu II effee', it is requisite that certain provisions should be made so as to adapt the 
 same to the present Constitution of the United States ; be it enacted, &c." 
 
 If nothing had transpired from that day to this on the subject, that recognition (by the first Congress 
 that sat under the Constitution, composed, in a large part, of members of the Convention that framed the 
 Constitution) of the power of Congress to legislate on the subject of slavery in the Territories, would 
 with me carry a weight of authority that I should long hesitate to dispute; but as we progress, we will 
 see that much more has been done, both as to the recognition and exercise of this power. 
 
 On the 7th April, 1798, the act providing for the Mississippi territory was passed, and in that act 
 Congress prohibited the importation of staves into the Territory from beyond the limits of the United States; 
 thus showing the power of Congress over the subject of slavery in the Territories, which it could not 
 exercise over the States; for the right of importing slaves was expressly secured to the States until the 
 year 1808, by the following provision of the Constitution: 
 
 " The migration or imjiortalion of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think pro(>er to admit, shall not be 
 prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one tlioosand eight hundred and eight, bqt a tax or duty may be imposed on such 
 importaiion, not exceeding ten dollars for each nersou." 
 
 But let us proceed. In 1804, an act was passed, which was entitled " An act erecting Louisiana 
 into two Territories, and providing for the temporary government thereof;" the 10th section of which 
 provides, first, that "It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to import or bring into said Ter- 
 ritory, from any port or place without the limits of the United Stales, or cause or procure to be so im- 
 ported or brought, or knowingly to aid or assist in so importing or brint-ing any slave or slaves." 
 
 Secondly, it prohibits the introduction of slaves from within the limits of the United States, imported 
 since the first of May, 1798; and, lastly, it declares — 
 
 " No slave or slaves shall directly or indirectly be introduced into said Territory, except by a citizen of the United States re- 
 moving into said Territory for nciucl settlement, and being at the lime of said removal, bona fide owner of snch slave or slaves ; 
 and every slave or slaves brought into said Territory, contrary to the provisions of this act, to be thereupon entitled to and receive 
 his or her freedom." 
 
 This act received the approbation and signature of Mr- Jefferson; and by it, the power of Congress 
 over the whole subject of slavery in the Territories is clearly, indisputably, and irresistibly recognized; 
 for if Congress had the power to declare all slaves free that might be carried there, except by "a« ac- 
 tual settler" and ^'■honafidt owner," it cannot be denied, or doubted, that they had an equal right to 
 declare them all free, no matter by whom or under what circumstances they might be introduced. 
 
 In 1812, precisely similar provisions were adopted relative to the Territorial Government of Missouri, 
 which received the approbation and signature of Mr. Madison. 
 
 Again, in 1819, the same provisions were enacted for the Territorial Government of Arkansas, and 
 that act was signed by Mr. Monroe. 
 
 These Territories have all since become slave States, and were not provided for by the ordinance of 
 '87, as they constituted no part of the JN orth western Territory. 
 
 In 1836 the " Wihnot Proviso" was adopted in the act establishing the territorial government of 
 Wisconsin, which received the approbation and signature of Gen. Jackson, and in the year 1847 the 
 "Wilmot Proviso" was attached to the bill creating a territorial government for Oregon, and received 
 the approbation and signature cf Mr. Polk. 
 
 Such is the weight of authority to be derived from the action of the Legislative and Executive De- 
 partments of the Government for a period of nearly sixty years; and he is a bold man, or a thonghtless 
 one, who would, in the face of such .luthority, set up his own judgment now against it; for my own 
 part, I am disposed to yield to it — 1 know not how to resist it. 1 have heard nothing from any quarter 
 that has served to shake my confidence in the position assumed by those who have gone before us, and 
 who have heretofore commanded so large a share of our admiration and our faith ; the only arguments I 
 have heard against it have been derived from sectional feelings, or from sectional interests, and not from 
 the Constitution; and constitutional questions are not to be settled by our feelings or interests, but by the 
 letter and spirit of the law: that is our safest reliance and strongest security, for jf we may depart from 
 that, to be governed by our will, so may the North, whose fanaticism may do us great injustice. 
 
 But this is not all; there is yet other authority not less entitled to consideration, in my judgment, 
 than that alreaily cited: it is the authority of the Supreme Court; whose decisions are entitled perhaps 
 to even greater weight, from the fact that their conclusions are arrived at with more deliberation, with 
 more diligent research, with more accuracy and precision, with more learning and wisdom, and* with 
 Uss of passion and excitement, and with less reference to political effect, than any other tribunal or de- 
 partment of the Government. Vthat says that Court in relation to the jurisdiction of Congress over 
 the Territories of the United States 1 
 
 In the case of the schooner Exchange vs McFadden and others,- Chief Justice Marshall says: 
 
 " The jnri.sdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and aL-^o^ute. It issusreptihle of no limitation 
 not imposed by itself. Any restriction upon it. de.ivinj validity from an cxtf rnal source wonld imply a diminution of its sover- 
 eignty to the extent of the restriction, and an investment of that sovereignty to the same e.xtent in lliat power which could impose 
 such restriction. All e.xceptions, therefore, to the full and complete power of a nation wi:!:iii its o« u territories must be traced 
 op to the consent of that nation itsell. They can flow from no oti'.er legitimate source." 
 
This language is broad and comprehensive. This is national territory, and according to Judge Mar- 
 shall and the Supreme (^ourt, the jurisdiction of Congress over it is exclunve and absulute. It must 
 be so unless the Uoiistitution has elsewhere imposed the restriction^ and if the Constitution has imposed 
 the restriction, I only ask that it miy be painted out. This "external souice" spoken of, applies to 
 every other source than that of the general or national government, whether foreign or domestic. 
 
 Again, in the case of the American Insurance Co., and als., vs. Canter, (1st Peters,) Chief Justice 
 Marshall says: 
 
 " This treaty," by which Spain ceded Florida to the U. State.?, " is tlie law of tiie land, and admils llie inhabiiaats of Florida 
 to the enjoyment ol" the privileges, riglits, and iriiruuniiies of the ciiizens of the United States. It is unnecessary to inquire 
 whellier tliis is not their coiiililion independent of sti|iulation. They do not, however, participate in political power: they do 
 not share in the government until Floiiila .«liall become a State. In. the Tiir.antimp. Fioriil'i continues to be a terrUonj of the 
 United States, i^overncu by virtue of that clause in the Constitution which evtpownrs Cotiirress to make alt needful riUcs and 
 rcfftUations respecting the territory or other property belonsivfi to the. United iStatcs. 
 
 " Perliapstlie power of governing ateriitory belonging to the United States which has not by becoming a Stale acquired the 
 niean.-iof self goveinm -nt, may result uec^ssc.rily from the facts, that it is not witliin the jurisdiction of any particular State, and 
 ;S within the power and jurisdiction of the United States. Tiie right, to govern may be the inevitable consequences of the right 
 jO acquire •erritory. Wiiichever maybe the source, wli -uce the power is derived, the possession of it is unquestioned." 
 
 In the case of the Cherokee nation vs. the State of Georgia, Mr. Justice Baldwin says: " The power 
 given in this clause is of the most plenary kind. Rules and regulations respecting the territory of the 
 United States, they necessarily include complete jurisdiction- It was necessary to coiifer it without 
 limitation, to enable the new Government to redeem the pledge given by the old in relation to the for- 
 mation and powers of the new States." 
 
 Ju.stice Stoiy says: "The power of Congress over the territory is clearly exclusive and universal, 
 and is subject to no control." 
 
 The books are full of such authorities, and it is needless to cite more. Here, then, is the concurrent 
 testimony of every department of the Government; and yet we are threatened with Disunion upon the 
 exercise of this power in 1850, as if it were a new unsettled question, now for the first time presented. 
 
 But it appears to me that something more may be said on this subject, and with your indulgence, I 
 will proceed to give you the result of iny own reflections. 
 
 The first thing that strikes me wi'h force is, that if we conce<Ie the general power of legislation over 
 the territories to Congress, how is it that the subject of slavery has been taken out of the general power' 
 Where do we find the difference between that and any other species of property' And if the difference 
 exists, does it not devolve upon us of the South to show in what manner, by what clause of the Consti- 
 tution, it is made an exception, and in; not embraced in the general power? If we cannot show that, I 
 take it that we must yield the point. 
 
 But this territory is said to be the common property of all the people of the United States. Admit it: 
 is it not to be governed ? And by whom ' I supfose by the people ! How are they to govern it } It 
 can only be done through their representatives, even if the Constitution had been silent on the subject ; 
 and, being subject to their authority, it must either lie controlled by the majority or the minority. If the 
 majority don't control it, the minority must ; and if the minority don't, the majority must. Now, which 
 is it right, in this boasted Republic of ours, based upon the very principle of majorities, however small, 
 for the election of all officers, for the passage of all laws, for the imposition of all taxes, for the declara- 
 tion of war, and for all conceivable purposes, save that of ratifying treaties with foreign Powers; (for 
 which two thirds ib required,) — which, I say, is it right, should have the control, the majority or the 
 minority ? For one, I say the majority ; and for one, I will submit to that majority, although I may be 
 a sufferer. 
 
 Suppose Congress, acti'igas a local legislature for this territory, should regard horse-racing as a great 
 moral evil and public nuisance, (I certainly should differ with them in this,) but would they not (as in 
 several States they now do) have the right to prohibit it, and the introduction of race- horses for that 
 purpose ' Suppose they think gambling a great moral evil and a public nuisance, (in which I should 
 concur with them,) would they not have the right to prohibit the introduction of billiaid, faro, and rou- 
 lette tables, or any other instruments for gaining i" Suppose they think the use of ardent spirits a great 
 moral evil and a public nuisance, would they not have the right to interdict the introduction and use of 
 distilleries ' Suppose the small pox were to bresik out in all the Northern manufactories, while the 
 Southern factories were free of all disease, would they not, for the protection of the people of the Ter- 
 ritoriis, have the rinht to prohibit the introduction of all goods from the infected districts or factories ! 
 And suppose they think slavery a great moral evil and public nuisance, why have they not the same 
 right to prohibit its introduction also ? It appears to me they have, for I cannot find ihtit the Constitu- 
 tion makes any difference between that and any other species of property. Congress shall have power 
 to make a// nee. Iful rules and regulations. Where is the limitation or restriction .' Net^dlul for what ? 
 For the protection of life, liberty, and [troperty ; for the security and enjoyment of all their civil and 
 politicttl rights ; to preserve them whilst subject to its jurisdiction from all immoral, evil, or pernicious 
 tendencies; in short, to do whatever a local legislature or a paternal government may do, for its own 
 jieople. who have none else to look to for their protection ; and who is to judge of what is needful ? 
 Surely tho^^e who constitute a majority of the whole. 
 
 Mr. President, I am not in the habit of taking positions, or forming opinions lightly and without rea- 
 son ; still less do I choose, when I am acting as your representative, to take grounds that I cannot sus- 
 tain by artiumint, if required, for that would reflect on you as well as on me. These, then, are my 
 reasons for entertaining the opinion, (and for having expressed it when I was called on,) that Congress 
 had the constitutional power to pass the Wilmot proviso ; and it is not enough for gentlemen who choose 
 
to assail my position to say, " they disagree with me, and I am a Southern man withNorthern feelings." 
 Let them answer my arguments, and point out all its errors and defects, and "it shall please me well," 
 for I am willing to be convinced. It cannot be regarded, I trust, as an error of great magnitude, to 
 think with Gen Washington, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Madison, and Chief Justice Marshall, on a question of 
 constitutional construction. 
 
 Let me not be misunderstood Let it not be supposed I am a Wilmot proviso man. Far from it. 
 I voted against it in every form in which it was presented while I was in Congress. I would do so 
 again. I feel constrained to say I have never attached the slightest ])ractical importance to its passage 
 or rejection, because 1 did not believe slavery could ever find its way there ; and, secondly, because I 
 have never been able to see that it would be of much value to the South if it could, further than that it 
 might enable us sooner to get lidof the slaves, which, if it is a blessing, as many seem to think, we 
 ought not to desire ; and if it is an evil, we ought not to in-ist on forcing it upon those who do not de- 
 sire it, and would not thank us for it. But tlie cost of carrying them to (Jalifornia would, of itself, be 
 a great obstacle in the way. 
 
 I believe Congress has the unquestioned power to declare war against all the world, but I am not there- 
 fore a war man. I believe Congress has power to ahandim the navy of the United States and substi- 
 tute Mr. Jefferson's old gun-boat system, qt nothing, in its stead ; but I am not therefore in favor of the 
 measure. I believe Congress has the po\ver to break up the whole postal system of the United States, 
 and leave it entirely to private enterprise; but I am not therefore in favor of breaking up all the post 
 offices and post roads in the United States. So, I believe Congress has the constitutional power to pass 
 the Wilmot proviso, but I am not therefore in favor of its pas.«age. 
 
 But com])laint is made of the inequality and injustice of this measure. I have not been able to view 
 it in that light. If (Congress were to say that a Northern man might carry slaves to Calitornia or New 
 Mexico, but a Southern man should not, then there would be inequality and injustice, which T would 
 join you in resisting. But it is not so. Congress says none, whether North or South, shall carry 
 them. Now, I will venture the assertion, that whenever you acquire the right to carry slaves to these 
 new territories, and make it manifest that it is a profitable investment to do so, there will be ten North- 
 ern dollars for every Southern dollar invested in that species of property. Just at this time there is, ac- 
 cording to Mr. Wise's account, tea dollars North for every one South, invested or engaged in the Afri- 
 can slave trade. This would arise not only from the fact that thej have a great deal more moneyed 
 capital than we have, but they have infinitely more of energy, enterprise, speculative capacity, and go- 
 aheaditiveness, and not much more cmscience, where money is to be made, than our own people. 
 
 Here, then, is a Southern man with a lot of slaves, that he is not able or willing to take to California, 
 and he wants to sell them to somebody that can or will ; and here is another, a Northern man, who 
 wants to buy for that purpose, but the law interposes, and says neither of you shall carry them ; upon 
 which does the injustice or the inequality operate most seriously.' I should say it would operate equally 
 on both; and I believe the case supposed would be a very common occurrence, and that the largest por- 
 tion of the slaves that might reach California, would do it through some such means, if it were not pro- 
 hibited. 
 
 But the South complains of it as a great hardship, that they are not allowed to convert the territory 
 of ('alifornia and New Mexico, or a part of it now free, into slave territory. There are two sides to 
 every question, and a fair man will look at both before he pronounced his judgment. 
 
 At the time of the formation of our Government there were thirteen States; there are now thirty; 
 consequently there have been seventeen since added; how have they been divided between the free and 
 the slave States '' There have been eight fref Staffs, to wit: Vermont, Maine, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, 
 Michigan, N^ isconsin and Iowa; and wne slave States, to wit: Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama. Mis- 
 sissippi. Florida, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Missouri. Surely the South has not had much cause 
 of complaint in this. But this not all: of the territory not originally belonging to the United States, 
 but since acquired, "bt/ the common blood and cnntmon treastire,^ or both, of all the States, there have 
 been formed the States of Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Florida and Texas, and the admission of four 
 more, provided for by the resolutions annexing Texas to the United ^<tates, makintr nine, all slave 
 States, and oifree States, not one.* These are stubborn facts, that we ought not to desire to shut out 
 from our senses. Where, then, is the grouqd of complaint on the part of the South, for which they 
 should call their sectional conventions, and threaten a dissolution of the Union? Wherever you have 
 taken slave territory, you have been permitted to retain it as slave territory, (at least no free States have 
 been formed out of it, and perhaps none will be. for that part of the territory of Louisiana acquired from 
 France, lying north of 36° 30', never had a slave in it, and, indeed, was never inhabited except by 
 Indians, who may continue to occupy it as long as the race is left,) and no threats of disunion have 
 proceeded from the North in consequence of it; but now that the South, whose Democracy forced upon 
 us the Mexican war, demanded the acquisition ot territory, as the price of peace, in opposition to the 
 views and wishes of the North ; now that the South is responsible for forcing this territory upon the 
 
 * In regard to the State of Iowa, a good deal of confusion and doubt seems to exist. The charter of Kirc James the First 
 granted in 1009, extended the limits of Virginia to the Pacific ocean ; and Virginia in her deed of cession to the tJ. P.,ceiles all the 
 territory beyond the Ohio contained in the charter. The treaty of \^(r.^. by which we ac(|nired l,ouisiana from France, simply 
 transfers the territory of Lonisiana without giving any limits or bonndariis ; .nnd the tivaly of St. Ildefenso in IKOO, hy which 
 France .icquired her title from Spain, is also .silent as lo the boundaries ; but I have no olijection thai Iowa should beset down 
 as one free State formed of the territory aetjuired since the Goveruraent was formed, and thus it would stand nine to one, and I 
 do not see that that alters the matter materially. 
 
country, and taking it as free te^-rUory, they threaten us with a dissolution of the Union, unless they 
 are allowed to carry slavery into it. For one, I say, as a Southern man, as a just man, the hardship is 
 magnified and distorted. It was all foretold, and the South would not listen to the predictions; and as 
 an honest man I must say I cannot attach blame to the North for resisting the extension of slavery to 
 this territory. If I were a Northern man I would resist it myself. No, gentlemen, in my opinion, this 
 IS a false issue we have made with the North; we cannot be sustained in it, and I will not embark in it. 
 
 What I would ask, and dt'ncvid of the -North, is, that tiiey shall not interfere with slavery as it ex- 
 ists under the Constitution; that they shall not touch the question of the slave trade between the States; 
 that they shall carry out the true intent and meaning of the Constitution in reference t ) the restitution 
 of fugitive slaves. These are the true issues between the North and tlie South; and I would go as far 
 as he who goes farthest, in exacting them, "at all hazards, and to the last extremity." And what I 
 would a-k of the South is, not to suffer itself to be led off, without due consideration, upon false issues, 
 presented by intemperate or over zealous politicians, many of whom delight in, and live upon, agitation 
 and excitement, and many more, perhaps, who owe their ephemeral fame and position to a pretended, 
 exchisive ch'/tnpirm-hip for Southern rights. Southern honor does not dfpend upon making unrea- 
 sonalile and untenable demands. The interference with, or ahiilition of, slavery, where it exists, is one 
 thing; the extension of it, where it does not exist, is a very different thing ! Let us claim no more 
 than we are entitled to under the Constitution; and then what we do claim, let us stand by, like men 
 who '' know their rights, and knowing, dare maintain them." 
 
 This brinsTs to my mind that " great abortion in Nashville,'" in which I h.ive to congratulate you that 
 this district was not represented. I cannot doubt that the original design of many of those most promi- 
 nent in getting it up was fully disclosed by Mr. Calhoun in his last moments; and that was, to make 
 an unconditional demand lor an amendment to the Constitution, or a dissolution of the Union. I do 
 not mean to charge this as the design of those who participated in the proceedings connected with that 
 subject in this district, and 7wt many in this State ; but I believe they were all a sadly mistaken set of 
 gentlemen, but no doubt patriotic. And since it has proved so signal a fadure, I have as little doubt it 
 will wind up with strong professions of devotion to the Union. It would not surprise me much if some 
 of the delegates were to return home, and claim credit for having taved the Union. If so, it will be 
 like one man pushing another overboard to drown him, and after making every effort to do so, finding 
 him an expert swimmer, that he could not sink, helps him out, and claims credit for saving his life. 
 The time for tournaments at our watering places is fast approaching, and a lecture on knight errantry 
 may be looked for with some interest on the return of a fiortion of the Virginia delegation ; their ex- 
 perience on this subject will be greatly improved by the trip. 
 
 Mr. President, I di-smiss this important branch of the subject — I mean the jurisdiction of Congress 
 iver the Territories — immediately connected as it is with other matters that I mean to present to your 
 consideration, and I proceed to an examination of the "compromise," "adjustment," or "settlement," 
 whichever it may be termed, as proposed by the Committee of Thirteen, in the Senate of the United 
 States, which has grown out of the agitation of the question which I have already discussed. 
 
 Now, I beg to know why this measure, presented by a committee composed of the most prominent 
 men of both parties, and of all .sections of the country — of men commanding, in an extraordinary de- 
 gree, the confidence of their respective parties and sections — for the adjustment of all sectional embar- 
 rassments, should not meet with the undivided support of the South. 
 
 What has the South ever demanded that is not yielded to them ? And what is it that they yield in 
 return of which they can justly complain f" Let us take up the different features of the compromise, 
 one by one, and examine them carefully and deliberately. 
 
 First, in reference to the admission of California as a State. What has been the doctrine of the 
 South i* That the people of the Territories should determine for themselves, in forming their own State 
 Constitutions and a.'ikina for admission into the TTnion, whether they would allow or prohibit the intro- 
 duction of slavery ! Well ! what has been done in this case 1 Have not the people of California de- 
 termined that slavery shall be prohibited 1 There has been no action on the part of Congress in refer- 
 ence to this subject that can be complained of I grant that there has been great informality and irregu- 
 laiity in the adoption of the Constitution in California, which should first have been authorized by a 
 law of Congress ; but, in consideration of the peculiar condition of that people, their distance from the 
 seat of Government, the indispensable necessity for a form of I'overnment and laws, which <'ongress 
 had neglected to provide for them — such informalities might well b» overlooked, as they involve no vio- 
 lation of the Constitution ; especially by those who favored and frrced the admission of Texas, by a 
 joint resolution, in despite of all constitutional prohibitions or objections. And who beheves that if 
 slavery had been authorized by that constitution that the South would not have been as earnest foi its 
 admis.-ion as many of its representatives are now oppo.sed to it ! .And in that case, I am as free to say, 
 I believe^the position of the North would have been also changed, and they would have resisted it. 
 
 I know it has been charged that the Federal Executive interfered and procured the adoption of that 
 provision of the constitution of California. I have seen no evidence of this fact, and I acquit the Ad- 
 ministration of all such impropriety of conduct ; especially when I can find abundant reasons for such a 
 disposition on the part of the people of (Jahfornia, in the absence of such Executive influence 
 
 When we reflect upon the fact, that a very large proportion of the people of the United States, who 
 have settled in California, have gone from the free States ; that another large proportion of that popula- 
 tion are from all quarters of the globe, where slavery is held in abhorrence, and that the small proportion 
 of Southern men now there are themselves opposed to the extension of slavery within their limits, (as I 
 
would be myself, if I were there, just as I would now be against its introduction into Virginia if it did 
 not already exist,) we should be satisfied that it is the fixed and unalterable determination of the people 
 of California forever to exclude it, as an incubus upon their prosperity. For my own part, I do not be- 
 lieve that the unanimous voice of Conjress and the Executive, and all the politicians of the South, 
 could force it there ; and if the attempt were made, it would produce a revolution in California that 
 would end in the declaration of her independence. 
 
 It is also objected that the liin'.ts of the State are too large, and that the Atlantic States will be cut oflF 
 from all connexion with the Pacific, except through a free State What pucri'ity ! What advantage 
 could we derive from a connexion through a slave State that is not secured lo us through a free State ? 
 What difficulties have been encountered bj' the commercial world, because the intercourse and com- 
 merce of the country has been carried on chiefly through the yVf e ^^tate of New York ? Have not the 
 States in the great valleys of the Ohio and Mississippi equal privileges, and rights, and facilities of ac- 
 cess to tlie Atlantic, through Virginia or A'ew York, as they may prefer .' This objection I regard as 
 worse than idle ; it is ridiculous. 
 
 One argument employed by the South is that Congress may make rules and regulations for the terri- 
 tory itself in the words of the Constitution, but this gives them no right to legislate for the people of the 
 Territory. But they have themselves dtslroyed any force that such a position might have been supposed 
 to possess, by making objection to tlie admission of California on the ground that Congress had not 
 prevwush/ leixisla'ed for the people, by authorizing them to form a constitution, fixing the right of suf- 
 frage, &c. Now, as a carpenter would say, these two positions don't dovetail together — the one is in di- 
 rect conflict witii the other — one or both must be abandoned. 
 
 But to my mind tlie most wonderful of all propositions yet made by the South, is that for the division 
 of the territory by the line of 36 dog. 30 rain., known as the Missouri Compromise line. Let us not 
 forget that this whole question has grown out of a struggle for political power, between the North and 
 the South. Let us not forget that the population in California north of 36 deg. 30 min., is composed 
 of the same description of persons as those north of that line. Let us not forget the inconveniences, 
 embarrassnents and troubles that would arise to a slave State on the Pacific, bordering on the free State 
 of North California, so much larger and more populous than itself, and so remote from all other slave 
 States; and lastly, let us not forget that when the Constitution of (-alifornia prohibiting slavery, was 
 submitted to the people of California for adoption or rejection, there were only twenty odd votes north 
 of the Hne of 36 deg. 30 min. given against its adoption, and then ask ourselves what probability there 
 is of ever establishing a slave State in that territory! And, above all, let us ask ourselves, where is the 
 wisdom, where is the policy, what is the meaning of Southern representatives, (with these facts before 
 them) in pressing a division of the territory; thus adding increased strength to the North, by giving 
 them two free States, when they are satisfied with one, and four Senators, when they are satisfied with 
 two' Why the north don't accept it, and accept it with avidity, is a mystery tome. But, I apprehend, 
 as the North advanced, the South would recede, and it would be found that the proposition proceeded 
 from a captious opposition, and a fixed desire to defeat an adjustment of the question. 
 
 During this discussion in the Senate, Gen. Cass put the question in the most direct and emphatic 
 form, to know whether there was one Southern Senator who would be willing to accept the Missouri 
 Compromise, in relation to California; and, if I mistake not, there was not one then that would. Mr. 
 Calhoun himself rejected it, and often denounced it. 
 
 Thi« being a question of political power between the North and South, would you not doubt the 
 wisdom or sincerity of any Northern Representative, who would insist on making six slave States out 
 of the Territory of Texas, when y»u only demand and are satisfied with four; and giving you twelve 
 Senators when you only ask for eight? Is there any man who does not believe that if the Committee 
 had proposed to divide California, the iVorth would not have struggled to keep it together; at least until 
 Texas was divided into slave States, for the purpose of keeping up what is termed the "equilibrium" 
 between the free and the slave States. 
 
 I maintain, then, that the original demand of the South, that the people should determine for them- 
 selves on their admission as States, whether slavery should be allowed or prohibited, has I'een complied 
 with in regard to < California, and that the only real objection arises from informalities and irregularities, 
 which are not sufficient of themselves to justify the long protracted agitation and discord that would 
 ensue. 
 
 As an isolated proposition, I njight hesitate myself before I would vote for its admission now; but as 
 one of a series of measures for restoring tranquility to the country, I could not hesitate or doubt. But 
 if the principle be sound, that the South is entitled to establish slavery in one half of this Territory, be- 
 cause she paid half the purchase as well in blood as in money, then let her claim her entire share of one 
 full half, and not this narrow steep of barren and inhospitable soil. 
 
 And then again, if this principle be recognized, and we shoula ever acquire Canada by purchase or 
 by conquest, or both, we must, of necessity, claim to convert one-half of that also into slave territory; 
 and in like manner, if we should ever acquire (.'uba, we must be prepared to say to the North, you re- 
 linquished to us half of California as slave territory, you have participated equally with us in the pur- 
 chase or conquest of Cuba, let us divide it equally into free and slave territory, take your half and do 
 with it as you please — make free States of yours whilst we will make slave States of ours. Is the South 
 prepared to do this? if not let her abandon this proposition to divide by the line of 36 deg. 30 min. The 
 Constitution applies with equal vigor and force, and carries the same principles into every part of the 
 country, whether north or south of that line. It says and knows of no dividing line at 36 deg. 30 min. 
 
or elsewhere; it is the same in its application, whether it be in California, Canada, or Cuba, if the two 
 latter should ever become a part of the United Slates. 
 
 Let us not then seek to establish an abstraction from which no practical good can result, but which 
 may lead us into interminable difficulties hereafter in relation to other territory. 
 
 So much for California. Let us now look at the Territories of Xew Mexico and Utah. What has 
 been the extent of the demand heretofore made by the South in reference to the formation of territorial 
 governments? It was that nothing should be said or done upon the subject of slavery, that the North 
 should relinquish their demand for the passage of the " Wilmot Proviso," and that it should be left to 
 the people of these Territories themselves, when thoy enter the Union as States, to determine vvhether 
 they would admit slavery or not And that is precisely what is done. The Committee of Thirteen 
 have forborne to express any opinion even as to the power of Congress to adopt such a provi.«ion, yet 
 there are malcontents who insist upon a denial of the power in terms. Well, if we insist on a denial 
 of the power, will not the North naturally insist on the asscition of the power? We talk a great deal 
 about what our State Legislatures h:ive resolved, and re-re.solved, and that we must stand up to the honor 
 of the State. Uo we forget that there are Legislative bodies in the free States also, whose powers are at 
 least equal to our own, and whose declarations are entitled to as much respect? And do we forget what 
 they have witli one voice re-olved on this subject? Driven to it, no doubt, in many instances, by the 
 unwise denial of the power on our part. And is it not yielding a great deal, believing and feeling as 
 they do in reference to this subj-ct, confident in the constitutional power, and conscious of their superi- 
 ority in numbers, is it no concession on their part to give up both the exercise and aesertlon of the power, 
 /or the sake of peace ? . . , 
 
 What do Southern representatives hope for m.ore, in regard to the territories, than this concession' 
 If this compromise or settlement (I care not for names I go for substance) should be rejected, can they 
 doubt that, soower or later, territorial governments will be established, and the \^ ilmot proviso attached 
 to each!" And the South, in my opinion, will be served right, if it should be so ; provided they now 
 reject this healing measure, this peace olfering, that is tendered them. And upon whom, then, wdl the 
 responsibility rest for its passage? 
 
 I deshe to examine this question in another aspect. Nothing can be more clear than that, according 
 to the law of nations, where a portion of the territory of one nation is ceded to another, or acquired by 
 conquest, that the political laws, which Vattel defines '• to be those laws which concern the relations of 
 the people with their sovereign," are changed, but that the civil laws, which he defines "to be those 
 ■which regulate the right and conduct of the citizens among themselves," remain in full force, until they 
 are altered by the government by which they have been acquired. And in the case of the American In- 
 surance Company v^. Canter, (1st Peters,) Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering the opinion of the Su- 
 preme Court, in speaking of the transfer ot Florida to the United States, says : 
 
 " On such transfer of teriitorv, it has never bec-n held that the relations oftlie inliabltants wit!i each other undei^o any change. 
 Their relations with their foinier sovereign are dis,o!ve<;l. and new r-lations are created between theni and t le government whieh 
 has acquired their terrllorv. The same act which transfers their country transfers the allegiance of those who remain in it ; an. 
 the law, whicli may be denominated political, is necessarily changed, although that which regulates the intercourse and general 
 cundnct of individuals remain in force, until altered by the newly created power ot the ttate. 
 
 It will not be questioned, I presume, that the authority of Vattel and the judgment of the Supreme 
 Court are alike entitled to the highest consideration. At all events, I apprehend the people of New 
 Mexico will be likely, in their present condition, to claim the benefit- of whatever the law of nations may 
 confer upon them; and we are estopped from resisting the decisions of our own highest judicial tribunals. 
 
 I think, then, there can be no just ground for opposition to the Compromise in the South on account 
 ef the terms proposed for the government of the Territories; and I therefore di^niss this branch ot the 
 subject, and will proceed to examine the question relating to the boundary of Texas, «fec. ^ _ 
 
 Strong hostility has been mani'ested to this feature of the Compromise, because, as has hern said, it 
 proposes to take, for a pecuniary consideration, with the consent of Texas, a large portion of her terri- 
 tory (now slavt territory,) and transfer it to New Mexico, (that is free territory,) thus enlarging the free 
 and diminishing the slave territory of the country. For the sake of the argument admit it to be so. 
 What right have we to complain, (except for the payment of the money,) if Texas chooses to sell her 
 territory to New Mexico or to the United States, who chooses, after the purchase, to include it withm 
 the Umits of one of her own Territories ? I suppose Congress has as much right to purchase territory 
 from Texas, as from Mexico or Virginia, or any other State, for public uses! Would any one question 
 the right of Congress to purchase our State armory in Richmond, and convert it into a National armory 
 if the^public exigencies required it? And if the Government can buy one acre from Virginia, she can 
 buy a million from Texas. Suppose Virginia chose to sell or exchange with Pennsylvania, (with the 
 consent of Congress,) what is called the Pan Handle of the State— I mean the county of Brooke, run- 
 ning way up into that State— would South Carolina have a right to interfere to prevent it because it 
 would be diminii^hing slave and increasing free territory. _ 
 
 But I utterly and emphatically dispute the proposition that you are yielding one inch of what is now 
 slave territory in Texas, to what will be free teriitory in New Mexico. 
 
 It is difticult to make myself entirely int. lligible unless I had a map before me; but my firm persua- 
 eion i^ that Texas gets more than she yields. The boundary line between New Mexico and Texas is 
 wholly undefined. Texas, by virtue of a treaty made with Santa Anna when he was a prisoner of war, 
 95 a condition of his release, which was never recognized by Mexico at all, claimed by legislative enact- 
 ment, to extend her limits so as to include all of New Mexico on this side of the Rio Grande; but it 
 
was the mere assertion of a claim, carrying as much authority with it as would a legislative enactrnent 
 by the State of Maine extending her limits so as to embrace Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. The 
 people of New Mexico did not participate'in the revolution of Texas— they have never been subject to 
 the laws or jurisdiction of Texas— they did not participate in forming the present Constitution of Texas, 
 and have had no more connection with Texas than with Virginia; and it was expressly stipulated in 
 the joint res)lution for the admission of Texas into the Union, that the power should be reserved to the 
 Government of the United States " to adjust all questions of boundary arising between Texas and 
 other governments," and there being no decided or ascertained matters of fact by which the question of 
 boundary could be legally settled by the Supreme Court, it must be settled, sooner or later, by compro- 
 mise. Not so, however, with a very large portion of the territory proposed now to be given to Texas, 
 as slave territory, which, beyond all doubt, m my judgment, belongs neither to Texas nor .New Mexi- 
 co, but belongs to the United States, and is free territory. I mean all that lying on the lower Rio Grande 
 between the Nueces and the Rio Grande purchased of Mexico by the late treaty. Certainly during the 
 whole progress of the Mexican war the entire Whig party of the United States sustained the claim of 
 Mexico to that Territory; and the most prominent of the Democratic party admitted it, including Mr. 
 Wright, Mr. Benton, Mr. Buchanan, and Mr. Polk. By Mr. Wright, at Watertown in New York, 
 in 18 II; by Mr. Benton, in his speech in the Senate on the ratification of the treaty, and by Mr. Bu- 
 chanan and Mr. Polk in their instructions to Mr.' Slidell. On the 10th of November, 1815, Mr. Bu- 
 chanan instructed Mr. Slidell as follows: 
 
 " But the PresMfnt desires to deal lilierally with Mexico. You are therefore authorized to offer to assume the payment of all 
 the just claims of our citizens aijainst Mexico ; and in addition, to pay five iiMllions of dollars in case the Mexican Government 
 shall agree to establish the boundary between tlie twocountries from the mouth of the Rio Grande up the principal stream to the 
 point where it touclies the h'ne of New Mexico ; thence west of the river along the exterior line of that province, and so as to 
 include the whole within the United States, until it again intersects the river ; thence np the principal stream of the same to its 
 source ; and thence due North until it intersects the forty second degree of North latitude." 
 
 Here, then, is an ofler from Mr. Polk to Mexico of eleven or twelve millions of dollars, for this very 
 territory now clainied by Texas, and which Southern opponents to the Compromise insist is given up by 
 Texas to New Mexico, in whole or in part. 
 
 Mr. Polk further showed that he did not recognize the claims of Texas above the El Passo, (near by 
 which, by the 5ih article of the treaty, is recognized as the Southern boundary of New Mexico,) or be 
 would not have ventured to have established a separate military government under Gen. Kearny in 
 Santa Fe. If he had supposed it was within the limits of Texas, then he would have been warring 
 against his own country. 
 
 Now the whole of this territory on the Lower Rio Grande, between that river and the Nueces, which, 
 in a report I ma^e as Chairman of the Military Committee, I have shown Texas has no claim to, is 
 yielded to her by this Compromise, and is thus converted into slave territory, and must constitute a 
 larger amount of territory than she can possibly surrender on her Northern boundary to New Mexico. 
 Let me read a short extract from the excellent speech of Gen. Shields, lately delivered in the Senate of 
 United States on this subject. He says : 
 
 " I will now notice the question of boundary lietween New Mexico and Texas. 1 admire Texas as highly as any man living ; 
 I like the State and the people ; they fought gallantly and successfully, and achieved their independence by a struggle as glorious 
 and extraordinary as any of the present age. I will say, also, that we ought not to criticise the claim of Texas too closely ; that 
 we ought to be liberal to that voung and gallant State.' If there be a doubt, it ought to be resolved in her favor. But to my 
 mind there is no doubt in the case. Texas has no claim, right or title to any portion of New Mexico, either on this side or on the 
 other side of the Rio Grande. She never conquered it ; never occupied it ; never reduced it to possession ; and never exercised 
 any authority over it. She has no more title to Santa Fe than she has to San Francisco— not a particle. That country, and the 
 wliole of that country, was under the law, jurisdiction and authority ol Mexico, when it was wrested from that country by the 
 arms of the United States. I care nothing about maps ; I take facts, and these are tacts. I venture to say fiirlher. that, in my 
 opinion, Texas never con(]uered all the country to the Lower Rio Grande. There is a portion of Coahuila, south of New Mexico, 
 on the Texas side of the Rio Grande, which I scarcelv think she ever conquered. At all ev. nt% I can say, that when at one time 
 during the Mexican war, I was wandering along llie Rio Grande, I found .Mexican towns in the State of Coahuila, on the Texan 
 side sfde of the river, lying quietly under Mexican law, and Mexican authority ; and if they had ever been conquered by Texas, 
 it was whollv witbont their knowledge, for thev were living in the most happy ignorance of such conquest. But while this is 
 my opinion, I am ready and willing to pay to Texas for such claim an she has, enough to wipe out her whole State ebt." 
 
 In the investigation after truth on this subject, I consider this authority of much moment ; it comes 
 from one of tlie Generals of our army in Mexico, now a Senator of the United States, and himself a 
 warm and zealous friend of Texas 
 
 Now I confess there is one objection that I entertain to this feature of the Compromise. It is that 
 which proposes to pay Texas a large sum of money — perhaps from seven to ten millions of dollars — for 
 yielding what I believe the has no more claim to, than she has to the coat on my back — nevertheless, I 
 would not permit that to stand in the way of the settlement of this great and exciting controversy. I 
 would pitch twenty millions into the ocean, and think I had made a good bargain, looking only to the 
 business interests of tlie country, and throwing out of view all other considerations of peace, harmony, 
 tranquility, and fraternal ties, to have this question finally adjusted ; and surely I would not permit the 
 payment of half that amount to Texas to stand as an obstacle to its adoption. I cannot consent to put 
 the Union, and its peace and concord, in one scale, and dollars and cents in the other. I utterly despise 
 tliose who calculate the value of the Union by dollars and cents — by (he pecuniary interest, and not by 
 the freedom, and grandeur, and glory of the Republic, that is derived from, and can be maintained only 
 by the Union of the States. I have never stopped, and never will, to enquire whether the value of ne- 
 groes is to be increased or diminished, under this state of things, or another ; and I have as much respect 
 for the patriotism of those men who tell me they would dissolve this Union before they would submit to 
 the Wilmot Proviso, because the price of slaves would increase if they could be carried to these new 
 territories, as I would have for another set who would calculate the value of the Union by the price of 
 their cattle, their mules, or their hogs. 
 
10 
 
 Let me pass on now to the other matters embraced in the Compromise bill. The next is the fugitive 
 slave bill ; and as little or no objection has yet been made to that provision, little need be said on the 
 subject. 
 
 I will n)t undertake to say that this measure will have the effect of suppressing all cause of complaint 
 against Northern fanaticism. I presume it would be quite as difFicult to prevent the commission of all 
 crime, or cause of complaint, by legislative enactment, on this subject, as it is to prevent murder, theft, 
 arson, burglary, or any other of the tt^ousand vices to which human nature is liable, by the enactment of 
 laws for the punishment of these offences. It is enough to know that it provides as far as can be done 
 by law, for the recovery of fugitive slaves ; it grants a trial by jury to the person claimed by the master, 
 at the place, and by the courts having jurisdiction, from which he is charged to have fled. I can see no 
 valid ground of objection to this, if the person restored still claim his right to freedom after his return. 
 Any person now held in bondage has a right to sue for and establish his freedom if he can, within our 
 own limits ; and surely, one seized abroad should not be deprived of a right that he would enjoy if he 
 had never left the State. Moreover, it might be necessary for the protection of those who otherwise 
 might be improperly seized ; for without this provision there is no telling to what extent the door might 
 be opened to bad, unprincipled men, to carry on a system of kidnapping. And, for one, while I wonld 
 do all that was necessary to protect the master in his right of property, I should be very reluctant to 
 protect slavery, at the expense of freedom ; or in other words, I would not be willing to adopt such a 
 system as would equally enable the lawful master and the unlawful kidnapper to claim the services of 
 the bond and the free, by mere affidavit or the exhibition of a record, that might be genuine or spurious. 
 I should have framed an additional clause to this bill, that might yet be adopted, imposing heavy peiial- 
 ties on every person who should attempt the rescue of a person once delivered up to the claimant by the 
 "Court," "Commissioner," "Judge," or other person authorized to grant certificates to claimants of fugi- 
 tives, " which shall authorize them to seize, arrest and transport such person to the State or Territory 
 from which he escaped." 
 
 In respect to the last feature of the Compromise, which proposes to abolish the slave trade in the 
 District of Columbia, I can see no objection to it. It is agreeable to the people of the District that it 
 should be broken up. It is of no advantage to us that it should be continued. There is nothing surely 
 in the slave trade in the District, that commends itself to our interests, our pride, or our humanity. 
 
 If I am not mistaken, the first proposition ever made in Congress for abolishing that trade in the Dis- 
 trict was by a former representative of the district adjoining this. I mean John Randolph, of Roanoke, 
 himself a Southern man, and a large slaveholder. Many of the most ultra pro-slavery men in Congress 
 have always favored that measure. 
 
 Upon the whole, then, I am clearly, distinctly, and emphatically in favor of the compromise. I be- 
 lieve nine-tenths of the people of this State and of the country are in favor of it ; and I am only sur- 
 prised when the whole country — tired, worn out, and disquieted as it is, with the agitation of this ques- 
 tion, and all demanding its settlement, that the people are not everywhere more active in getting up in- 
 structions to their misguided representatives to vote for its adoption, for it looks to me like madness, 
 amounting almost to wickedness, in the South to defeat it. 
 
 To show that I am consistent in my views on this subject, I take occasion here to present my own 
 plan for the adjustment of this question, drawn up on the day of my return from New Orleans, which 
 was on the 10th of February — long before this committee was appointed, and I believe before it was 
 proposed, and before I had ever seen one of the series of the resolutions proposed by Mr Clay. Indeed 
 I am not sure whether he had then made his speech or not. 
 
 1st. " Resolved, That by the Constitution of the United States, the general power of legislation for the territories belonging to 
 the United States is vested in Congress, and as that instrnment makes no distinction between slave and other property, in refer- 
 ence to such legislation, Congress has the ])ower in forming a territorial or temporary government, to affix that portion of llie or- 
 dinance of 1787, which prohibits the introduction of slavery where it does not e.xist at the time of such legislation. 
 
 2rt. " liesolocd. That ir is inexpedient and unwise in Congre^s to exercise a power which can result in no practical good, es- 
 pecially when snch power is densed by a large portion ot the Confederacy, and which is likely to lead to discontent and disaffec- 
 tion among the members of the Union. 
 
 3d. " jUesolved, That the introduction or prohibition of slavery in any of the territories of the United States should be left to 
 tlie fair and uncontrolled decision of the people of such territory or territories, as they may be admitted as States in the Union. 
 
 4tli. " Resolved That it is expedient to retrocede the reriiainder of the District of Columbia to the State of Maryland, reserv- 
 ing the public buildings and other public property to the j^ri^dietion and control of Congress. 
 
 5th. " Resolved, That Congress has no tight to interfere with the slave trade in or between the several States. 
 
 6th. " Resolved, That it is the du'y of Congress to malic such provision by law as may he necessary to secure the recovery of 
 fugitive slaves, as provided for by the iJd section of the 4ih article of the Constitution, and that is the duty of the several States 
 to pass snch laws as will effectually prevent the violent or unauthorized interference on the part of their own citizen to defeat 
 such legal recovery. 
 
 7th. " Resolved, That the preservation of the Union, in all its integrity, is paramount to every other question yet presented 
 to the consideration of the public mind, and that it should be the object, as it is the duty of every pure and patriotic citizen, to 
 discountenance and discourage the agitation of such questions as are calculated to disturb the tranquility of the Union." 
 
 These resolutions embrace my own original views, and furnish the basis upon which I desired to see 
 this matter adjusted. How, then, can I object to the Compromise proposed? 
 
 Having now given my views on all these absording questions, I am brought to consider the position of 
 the administration towards this measure — the obligations devolving upon it — the pledges it has made, 
 and the manner in which those pledges have been fulfilled. 
 
 I desire to speak of this administration with kindness and approbation whenever I can honestly and 
 consistently do so. ' I shall " nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice." I shall not speak with 
 harshness, but with decision, approving where I can, and condemning where I must. I said I would 
 judge the tree by its fruits, and I hold it due to the district and my own honor to say honestly what I 
 think of it. And here I wish to say, that I desire it to be understood, that I occupy towards this admin- 
 
11 
 
 istration precisely the same position that I intend to hold towards all other administrations that niay 
 exist while I live, and that is, to claim the privilege of approving what I think right, ;uid of condemning 
 what I think wrong. I owe certain obligaiions to my party, but I owe still higher obligations to my 
 country ; and no pany ties or trammels shall ever induce me to support man or measure hereafcer, that my 
 judgment condemns, or that I may think would prove injurious to the country. I shall struggit', whether 
 in public or private life, to maintain popular rights, the general prosperity, and the welfare and honor of 
 the country ; to applaud virtue and condemn vice, wherever they are to be found, no matter who may 
 fill the E.xecutive chair, whether he belong to my party or another. 
 
 Now, in regard to the foreign policy of this adminiNlration, I am happy to concur with it. I think it 
 has been, in the general, wise, conciliatory, conservatitive and dignified. I know of but one thing of 
 importance they have done in which I cannot concur, and I do not mention that in a spirit of complaint 
 but to protect myself from misapprehension, as well in the future as at the present moment. I speak of 
 the late action of the government in employing the naval forces of the United States to arrest the in- 
 vaders of Cuba. After a very careful examination of the law of 1818, I have not been able to satisfy 
 my mind that the President had any authority to send our vessels of war on an exploring expedition 
 upon the high seas in search of Lopez and his men. Undoubtedly, by the terms of that act, it he had 
 had knowledge that there was such an organization fitting out, whilst it was wiihin th'- jurisd'ction of 
 the United Stales, he was not only authorized but required to suppress it. But if he permitted it to 
 escape beyond the jurisdiction of the United States, which extends three leagues from shore, in my opin- 
 ion he had no authority to send out and have them brought back. 
 
 I cannot believe that the jurisdiction mentioned in that law, was the jurisdiction afterwards contended 
 for, if I recollect rightly, in 1842, by Mr. Webster, in his correspondence with Lord Ashburton. There 
 can be no doubt that the jurisdiction of every nation extends to every sea where its flag m.iy float, for 
 certain purposes, such as the suppression of piraL;y, the punishment of murder, robbery and mutiny, and 
 the protection of its flag ; but for other purposes, the high seas are a great high way, free for all ; and 
 I think Great Britain would have had the same right tointerfere to suppress this invasion fhatour Govern- 
 ment had under the circumstances ; for there is a lother jurisdiction, more limited in its extent, and 
 when the law of 1818 provides for the punishment of those who may begin or set on foot such an e.'?pe- 
 dition witMn the territory or juiisdiction of the United States, and authorizes the President to "em- 
 ploy such part of the land or naval forces of the United States, or militia thereof, for the purpose of 
 taking possession of and detai.ning any such ship or vessel ;" and also " for preventing the carrying on 
 of any such expedition or enterprise from the territories or jurisdiction of the United States" It re- 
 lates, in my opinion, to the limited maritime jurisdiction, and not to the unlimited and illimitable juris- 
 diction now contended for. Tfie same law speaks of such an expedition going " beyond the limits or 
 jurisdiction of the United States," and yet, if it be the jurisdiction contended for, while they might get 
 beyond the jurisdiction of the United States, for it would have no limits. However, I am not disposed 
 to argue this question. I have not adverted to it for the purpose of complaint against the Executive, but 
 to protect myself against misapprehension, when I was expressing so general a concurrence in the man- 
 agement of our foreign affairs. It may be that I am wrong, and the administration right. Be this as 
 it may, it was, at most, I think, but a misconstruction of its authority, proceeding, I have no doubt, 
 from a conservative spirit and an honest desiie to preserve the peace of the countiy, and discharge its 
 supposed obligations to Spain, though I must say the same vigilance was not shewn either in regard to 
 the Irish or Hungarian regiments, proposed to be raised in open day in the city of New York, to aid 
 those people in their struggle for liberty. 
 
 Before Gen. Taylor was elected, he wrote a great many letters, in which I certainly understood him 
 to make a great many pledges ; some of which I objected to at the time ; and some of those to which I 
 did object, I do not think he has adhered to very rigidly. He certainly did say — and no denial of it 
 here or elsewhere can alter the fact — that he would not make a party President, and that all he meant 
 when he said he was not an " ultra Whig," was, that he would not turn men out of office indiscrimi- 
 nately, for opinion's sake. Now, I must admit that I think he has violated that pledge, and that he has 
 turned men out for opinions sake; and what is a good deal worse, he has put others in only ior opinion's 
 sake ; certainly not for merit, virtue, talent, usefulness, or public character they possessed. But I make 
 no complaint about the removals ; I speak o"it as a fact. I leave it as a matter between his own con- 
 science and himself, as far as 1 am concerned. He may turn out eveiy Locofoco in the United States, 
 and I shall shed no tears nor make any clamor about it. They are entitled no sympathy at my hands, 
 I think there are a great many now in ofliee tha he might turn out with advantage to the public inte- 
 rest. I object a good deal more to putting in than to the putting out ; especially to the putting in of such 
 men as James Watson Webb, just at the moment of the meeting of Congress, with a full knowledge 
 that he would be rejected by the Senate. (He got, I believe, five votes for his confirmation ) That ap- 
 pointment, I must say, amounted to little less than pilfering the public Treasury, to reward a political 
 partizan, which the warmest friend of the administration will hardly undertake to justify. 
 
 These were pledges to which I objected at the time, because I wanted him to make a Whig PrcEi- 
 dent, and because I wanted him to turn many of the Locofoco party out of office, that he might give 
 them to Whigs, since the system of proscription had been established by our opponents. 
 
 But there was another pledge made by Gen. Taylor to which I did subscribe, and to which, as far as 
 I can, I will hold him Sound, and which I will undjrtake to show he has grossly violated. 
 In the Allison letter of 22d April, 1848, Gen. Taylor says : 
 
 " The power given by the Constitution to the Executive to intrrpose his veto, is a hi?h conservative power, bat in my oftihldn 
 should never be exercised, except in cases of clear violation of the Constitnlion, or manifest hasie or want of consideration by 
 Congress, Indeed, I fiave thougtit t/iat,for many years past, the known opinions and winhes of Uie Eiecuticv have ezercised 
 
12 
 
 undue and ivjuriovs influence vpon the heffislatir-e rxpartment of the Oovervment ; and for this can-'e I hare thmxrht our 
 system was >n danger of undergoing a great chavgefrom its true theory. The personal opinion of the indiridiuil who may 
 happen to occupy the Executive Chair ought not to control the action of Congress upon questions of donieshc pol.cy ■ nor 
 ought his objp.-l.ons to be interposed wliere questions of constitutional power hBve been settled by :!;e rarious depariinents of the 
 government. ■' '^ 
 
 Now, I venture the opinion, that of all the promises and pledges contained in the numerous letters we 
 had from (ien. Taylor during that memorable canvass, there was not one mere extensively and success- 
 fully employed by the public press, and the public speakers, than the one quoted, in which he deprecates, 
 in the strongest terms, interference on the part of the Executive with the legislative department of the 
 Government. Such interference, direct and indirect, had been a fruitful source of complaint for years 
 with the Whig party. The Whigs generally held that as constituting one plank in the plat.orm at least, 
 upon which they could stand side by side with him ; and those who desired to defeat his nomination, 
 gave in ih. ir adhesion to this sentiment, so strongly expressed, that the Lesiislative Department of the 
 Government should be kept (according to the true theory of the governmeiU) separate and independent 
 from the Executive. 
 
 Yet what are the facts— stubborn and undeniable facts — presented before us at this time 1 According 
 to the requirements of the Constitution, Gen. Taylor submitted " his plan " (as it is called) to Congress. 
 That was his duty, and there his duly rested. It should then have been left to the representatives of the 
 people to adopt it or reject it, or substitute a better plan in its stead, according to their views of the duty 
 they owed to their constituents and the country. Instead of which we find Gen. Taylor's ofEcial organ 
 in Washington (perhaps I might be justified in saying two organs, one certainly) exerting all its power 
 to press upon the favorable consideration of Congress the Executive plan, and denouncing the plan of 
 Compromise proposed by the Senatorial Committee, together with the prominent men of the Whig 
 party that favor it, in the most unmeasured terms. 
 
 We see, moreover. Gen. Taylor and a majority of his Cabinet, bending every energy of the adminis- 
 tration to force the Executive plan through Congress, in despite of the acknowledged wishes of an over- 
 whelming majority of the people, as far as it can be gathered from every quarter of the country. 
 
 We have seen him playing Jackson and Daane upon his first and best friend, Mr. Bullitt, whom he 
 brought from New Orleans to conduct his organ, because he could not fcvor the views of the Executive, 
 by displacing him, to substitute another more pliant to his will. And, lastly, we find him recommend- 
 ing the Exeentive plan by a course that I do not recollect a precedent f..r in all our previous history. 
 
 Mr. Wm. Duer, of New York, recently made a speech in the House of Representatives, warmly sup- 
 porting the President's plan. His constituents held a public meeting and expressed their approbation of 
 his course. They sent a copy of their proceedings to the President, (which is very common,) to which 
 he made the (ollowing reply, (which is very uncommon,) and which has been published withiu the last 
 few days: 
 
 Washington. May 13, IRSO. 
 BIR : I have to acknowledge your favor of the 9th instant, covering the proceedings of the nieetine held at t'azenovia on the 
 7th instant, to express eoncnrrence in the speech of Mr. Duer, iu support of the line of policy recommended hv the Executive 
 on the subject ot slavery. I am deeply indebted to the citizens ef Cazenovia for the expression of confidence and esteem 
 which this occasion has elicited, and for the approval which they have given to the course of their able representalioe in 
 Congress. 
 
 1 am, very respectfully, your ob' dient servant, Z. TAYLOR. ' 
 
 H. A. CooLiDGE, Esq., Cazenovia, New York. 
 
 Now, I beg you to contrast this letter with ihe Allison letter before referred to, and ask yourselves 
 ■whether, in the language of Gen. Taylor, " an undue and injurious influence is not likely to be exer- 
 cised upon the legislative department of the Government, and whether our system is not in danger of 
 undergoing a great change from its true theory?" 
 
 I happen to know Mr. Luer, having served in Congress with him when I was there IpsI — and I take 
 pleasure in saying I believe him to be an intelligent and estimable gentleman ; and I have no reason to 
 suppose he wanis anything at the hands of the Executive; but if it should happen, as it sometimes 
 does, that there are any there who would be wil ing to purchase Execitive favor at the expense of their 
 public duty, I ask you if the way is not pointed out (whether intended or not) by which it can be ob- 
 tained ? Many a fish has been caught in that great political pool with a smaller bait than this. 
 
 Under sriinary circumstances, if we were to behold a President of the United .States, especially one 
 standing as the representative ot the conservative party of the country, resisting the will of the people 
 to carry out a plan or measure of his own, we should not be, and have not been heretofore, slow to con- 
 demn it. But when we see that head, who could, by acquiescence in the plan of the committee, settle 
 all the diffieulties that agitate the nation, restore peace and tranquillity to a disturbed and irritated peo- 
 ple, reunite the difl'erent sections of the country in the bonds of fraternal concord, not only withholding 
 that acquiescence, but eagerly pressing a plan of his own, from which nothing but continued agitation 
 and increased dissension can ensue, I must say that in my opinion it is time for every man to speak out 
 boldly in reprobation of the course. 
 
 What does the Executive plan propose to do? Why, to admit California, and do nothing upon any 
 other subject. In gross neglect and violation of our treaty stipulations with Mexico, to leave the in- 
 habitants of iVew Mexico under a military government until they can prepare themselves to be admitted 
 as a State, which may not be for many years to come. Utah, too, to be left in a state of anarchy and 
 confusion. Texas and New Mexico, fighting as perhaps they are at this moment, over their disputed 
 boundary. The recovery of fugitive slaves, that fruitful bone of contention, which presents at last the 
 chief true issue between the North and the South, unprovided for ; or, in other words, to do nothing but 
 
13 
 
 keep up ihe agitation and excitement on the slavery question, until it can be brought to bear upon an- 
 other Presidential election. Sir, for one, I am constrained to condemn it, at whatever cost it may be to 
 nie personally or politically. That there is any wisdom in the plan, few will pretend ; what the motive 
 is, must be left to conjecture. When it was originally presented, I presume it was to avoui the respon- 
 sibility of deciding or acting on the Wilmot "proviso. But now that is avoided by the compromise ; 
 what vain elory, false pride, and jealousy of another, may have to do with it now, I leave to others to 
 determme." But ceriainly we have a right to demand a reason, in a free republic, for abandoning a por- 
 tion of the people to military government, who were transferred to us under a treaty stipulation, to be 
 provided with a civil government as soon as possible. 
 
 This is said to be the same plan presented by Mr. Preston at the last Congress. I know not whether 
 it is or no. I heard his speech at the time, and I regarded the whole affair us so puerile and preposter- 
 ous, that I dismissed it from my mind, and it has never entered it since. But I recollect this about it, 
 that his plan did nof get a single vote in the Committee of Whole, and was not, therefore, reported to 
 the House, fie did not even vote for it himself True, the Wilmot proviso had been tackcil un as an 
 amendment, which will account for his not voting for it ; but we know that that rather recommended it 
 to the favor of a majority of the House, yet there was not one man in the body " so poor a.- to do it re- 
 verence." Gov. Gayle, of Alabama, I recollect, passed through the tellers, and the report was about to 
 be made of one in the affirmative, and he walked hastily back the way he had gone, and was counted 
 back again to the great amusement of the whole House. Now, if this is substantially Mr. Preston's 
 plan, how is it, except through the instrumentality of Executive influence, that it has so many friends 
 now from the North, when one would not vote for it then. 
 
 One word in regard to the Galphin claim, which has elicited so much attention and remark. T have 
 no desire to discuss the merits of that claim. 1 certainly have an opinion upon it, and that is, that 
 there was no valid claim against the United States for either principal or inteiest. And 1 do not be- 
 lieve there is a man in the United .^tates ihat would have paid a dollar or recognized it as a valid clairn 
 against himself individually, under the same circumstances. Nor do I construe the law of '4«, " requi- 
 ring the Secretaiy of the Treasury to examine and adjust the claim, and to pay the amount which might 
 be found to be due," as directing the payment of any thing, or as recognising a dollar to be due ; it only 
 referred the matter to him to ascertain whether any ihing was due or not, and if not so, to report ; but 
 if the principal was due, the interest was not. It is a principle with the governmeni not to pay interest, 
 because the government is supposed to be always ready to pay the principal, and if there is just ground 
 for a depariure from this established rule, it should be by Congress, and not by the Cabniet, or any por- 
 tion of it. But if there be any reason in the rule, then I certainly cannot see why interest should be 
 allowed on a claim from 1773, that was never presented as a claim against the United States till 1837. 
 But this is not what 1 want to talk about. I believe the payment of this claim is universally condemn- 
 ed ; but in every instance that I have seen it condemned by those professing to be the fneiuis of the ad- 
 ministration, whether in Congress or in the press, I observe that they always lay it on pretty thick upon 
 the Cabinet ; but " with bated breath and whispcriitg humbleness," they exonerate the President, as if they 
 were afraid of givintr offence to somebody. Now in my opinion this is all wrong ; it is full of error and full 
 of mischief ft is the principle about which I wish to speak, and not the man or the claim. In England 
 tbe King can do no wrong: there the ministry are responsible ; but, then, when they And themselves in 
 a minority, they have the grace to retire. But here it is otherwise. Our ministers are noi in the habit 
 of resigning. Minorities have no terrors for them, while they are in office. It is only when ihey are out 
 that minorities are so intolerable, that any sacrifice of principle may be justified to gei iiiio a majority. 
 The Praideut alone is responsible to us. They are responsible to him. We eltct him, and //e appoints 
 <Aem, and he alone can remove them: and if they do wrong, and he retains them in his tonncleiice, it 
 is to him that we must look, and it is the President that we must hold responsible. I have adverted to 
 this case only to protest against the piactice, becoming to.o common, of exonerating the President from 
 all responsibility lor the conduct of his official advisers, and heaping it on them. VVliat they suggest and 
 he adopts, what they do and he approves and sustains, he is responsible for ; and the precedeiu is u danger- 
 ous one, that they must bear the responsibility and not the President. 
 
 Let us now look for one moment at the efl'ects that have been produced by the election and adminis- 
 tration of Gen. Taylor. In the first place, it has broken up the Whig party : from being m a clear ma- 
 jority, as was proved by the iact that we carried the Huuse of Representatives by a handsourj majority 
 in the middle of Mr. Polk's term, we are now in a lean minority every where. I be.ievi the Whig 
 party has been considered as successful but once since November, 1848, and that was in eariung one 
 district in little Rhode Island. It is useless to deny the fact, there is no nalionul Whig party now. No 
 partyism has absorbed it. The Democratic party being no longer " held together by ttie cohesive power 
 of public plunder," has dissolved itself There is no niitioval Democratic party. This is tlie first fruit 
 of Gen. Taylor's success. The next effect seems to have been to bring about a union of the Abolition- 
 ists of the North and the Disunionists of the South. I do not mean to do the " Southern Chivalry" the 
 injustice to say that there is any real sympathy — any cordiality of feeling between them ; indeed, I do 
 not know that they entertain a common respect for each other. I rather incline to think ilicy do not ; 
 but they are certainly working together in the same harness to perpetuate agitition and discord, by de- 
 feating the great healing measure that I hold to be above all party considerations, and that the country 
 I believe will hold in the same light. To these two parties is united a third, quite as numerous as the 
 other two, perhaps, more so, that might, with propriety, be denominated the " Shake par;}," who, like 
 a school of sharks at sea, follow tlip ship ot State, no matter in what water it flouts, whether deep or 
 shallow, clear or foul, to catch the crumbs that may be thrown overboard from the Exeeuiivt table; while 
 another effect seems to have been, to have brought together the sober-minde(^, reflecting, patriotic, and 
 
14 
 
 conservative portion of the old Whig and Democratic parties, who are now laboring to defeat the wicked 
 schemes of the agitators who would destroy this giganiic republic to carry out their own visionary or selfish 
 views. Thus we see such men as Clay and Cass, Foote and Webster, Mangurn and Dickinson, Downs and 
 Cooper, of op|)osing parties, and of opposite sections, working together for the common good ; while, at the 
 same time, we find Butler, Davis, Mason, Hunter, and other Southern Democrats earnestly co-operating 
 with Seward, Hale, and Chase, to defeat this great measure of peace and t.anquiliiy. What may be the re- 
 sult of this no man can tell. Of all the questions that divided the two parties, there are but two that have any 
 vitality left, and these are the questions of internal improvement, and the policy of protection to American 
 industry. Ujion the first, there is no affinity between the Northern and Southern Democracy ; nearly the 
 whole North, Whigs awd Democrats, are in favor of making improvements. The Southern Wliigs are also 
 united on tint ponit. In regard to the policy of protection, there can be no doubt that the country is in 
 favor of it. The entire Whig pc.rty, and enough of the Democracy of the North to constitute a very large 
 majority of the v/hole, are in favor of it. It is fast becoming the policy of the South, and I do not think 
 that will long be a source of serious disturbance between us. I have never seen why parties should have 
 been divided on that question ; for surely what was your interest on that subject (addressing the Democrats) 
 was ours, and what we should have done was to test the fact by experience, instead of quarreling over 
 it as a party measure. It is certainly an American and not a party question. Now what i wish to see 
 is the fullest and fairest opportunity given to this free trade Democratic tarifi' of 1846, to devolop itself. 
 Let all its virtues be tried — let its merits and demerits be fully tested. If it is a beneficial measure, and 
 answers the purpose of the Government for revenue, and the people for their prosperity, no one should 
 desire to see it disturbed ; and if, on the other hand, it is found to be inefficient and unsatisfactory, (as I 
 think it will.) then you should desire a change. Th^se remarks will apply with equal force to the cur- 
 rency question, which is in every respect a great national and not a party question, the interest of all 
 being equal and identical. What the country wants on these subjects is stability in legislation. And 
 now it looks to me very much like we should have a re-organization of parties, something like a " Uni- 
 ted RepuLdican party" composed of the true old Whigs and the conservative portion of the Democratic 
 party, that will scatter the Abolitionists, Di»unionists, and Sharks, to the four winds of Heaven in 185*2. 
 
 I have thus given you my views at some length on all the exciting questions of the present day. 
 They are views that I am willing to stand by and be responsible for, in this district and out of it, now 
 and hereafter. 1 do not know when Ishall make another political speech ; possibly, never. My views 
 in relation to public life have inideigone some change. I am a candidate for nothing in the world, 
 (except for niiitriiaony, [addressing the ladies,] and I fear I am getting too old to succeed in that,) and 
 shall never present myself, with my present views, as a candidate for any office again. I have been 
 long enough in the public service to enable the people to know whether my services are of any value to 
 them ; if they are worth having they are worth asking for, and whenever they are called for, I shall be 
 found ready to furnish them. My principles are fi.ved and known, and are not likely to undergo a 
 change ; at all events, they have not undergone a change yet. I am the same man and the same Whig 
 that 1 have always been. My opinions as to men have undergone great changes — not so with princi- 
 ples. I never expect to be any thing but what we have in days gone by, understood by "a Whig" — 
 that is to say, (to the Democrats) I am a Whig in principle, but a Democrat in every thing else. My 
 nature, my ieehngs, temper, disposition, habits and associations are all democratic. In this sense I have 
 always been a Democrat, and the oi'ly reason that I have for not acting with the party to which I natii- 
 rally belong, is, thai you let the Whigs get the advantage of yeu in the start, by taking the right side of 
 all these political questions, and, from false pride and obstinacy, and a perverse spi:it of opposition, 
 you took the other side ; and as long as you allow this to continue I am bound to act with them. 
 (Much laughter from both parties.) 
 
 But should I ever again have the honor of representing this district in Congress, it most be with the 
 understanding that I attach myself to party only so long as that party stands up to the principles upon 
 which I join it ; and when they leave their principles on the way side, to look after availibility.or spoils, 
 or any thing else, I am at liberty to keep on in the great high road that I set out with them to travel. 
 I say this, because it happened once that I joined a crew on board the good old ship Constitution, for a 
 long voyage and a tedious service; each pledged Ins honor to stand shoulder to shoulder until we reached 
 a certain port and attained a certain end. The voyage lasted some 18 or 2U years; during that time 
 we met with many a tempest and many a storm ; and if in the gale there was a sail to be furled, or a 
 rope to be spliced, I was always ready to go aloft and do my duty.' During the cruise we had many a 
 hard fight, sometimes with a lawful enemy, sometimes with pirates, but whenever the fight came on, I 
 was at ntf post, and did my share of service. Among the crew we had some frefh water chaps, who, 
 when the siorm rose, or the enemy came in sight, would skulk below, gather around the mess table, to 
 drink their grog, smoke their pipes, and spin long yarns, till the sky was clear, and the enemy were 
 driven off or captured, when they would come on deck and hurrah for victi ry and fair weather. At 
 length we came almost in sight of port ; the objects of the voyage were almost within our grasp ; a new 
 brig, (hermaphrodite, some called her,) just launched, hove in sight, with music playing, and banners 
 streaming in the breeze: the fresh water lads were captivated with the sight, and charmed with the 
 sound of music ; said they were worn out with the cruise, and tired of the old ship, and were afraid she 
 would spring a leak ; (her hull was old, but sovtiil as the day she was built ;) they proposed to tack our 
 sl ip, and steer away, to join the new ciafi. I refused to go on board ; said I would neither desert my 
 ship nor my old commander, who had been a skilful sailor all his life; they called me "niutiiieer ," I told 
 them we were safe as long as we held on to the "Old Constitution," that was always in sailing and 
 fighting trim ; that the new brig was too light in her timbers, she wanted ballast, and couldn't weather a 
 Btoim ; her commander was inexperienced, and her crew all land-lubbers, and if they abandoned the old 
 
15 
 
 ship for her, we should all be lost ; they cried "pitch him overhoai d ;" I remonstrated, and pointed to the 
 articles under which I shipped ; they said the artieles were old, and out of date ; some said they were 
 obsolete and the captain superannuated, and I must go with them or prepare for a watery grave ; I re- 
 plied I preferred death to desertion. The salt water sailors were called up; they said they didn't know 
 what to do ; they couldn't manage the ship by themselves, and if the fresh water boys went, they sup- 
 posed they must go along, though they preferred to stay where they were ; but they denied that I was a 
 mutineer, and said I should not be thrown overboard ; so they all went, and as 1 c:ouldn't manage the 
 ship by myself, I had to go too ; but I was never satisfied, and didn't work cheerfully, for I always felt 
 as if I had done wrong to desert a brave and faithful ofi'icer, and the good old Constitution, thai I loved 
 as I did my life ; and after a while the fresh water lads, who always charged me with mutiny and de- 
 sertion, managed to get me in a boat and shoved me ashore ; and there they left me, and there I am 
 yet. So that. I shad be careful with what sort of a crew I ship again ; 1 want all snlis, and no more fresh 
 water chaps, that will desert, themselves, and then lay all the blame on me. And I want it provided 
 in the articles that he shall be the " mulineet" who first proposes to desert the ship, or steer away from 
 the right track. 
 
 I should not forget to mention that the new brig was stranded in the first heavy gale, and the crew 
 were all lost or scattered, so that they never worked together again ; the survivors nearly all repented, 
 and wished they hod stuck fast with me to the old sliip, that iloated off to sea, and never was heard of 
 again, and our old conmiander, who still biaves the storm, and beats aside his enemies wherever they 
 show themselves. 
 
 Gentlemen, I am done. Permit me again to thank you for your kindness^ and for the gratifying atten- 
 tion with which you have listened to my lengthy remarks. * 
 
146 
 

 ^^<^' 
 
 
 
 >^ 
 
 f^^^* 
 
 
 
 
 <^ ^4 
 
 
 qV ^0*0 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 U€RT 
 
 BOOK8tNDINJC 
 r,ranr\illf Pa 
 
 
 
 c-