_ • Mexico at the time of their con- •
ThUi“ n important Jh, |
wlnile merits of the «« .
upon this point, 1 1829. ■
doubt. Slavery was . as i t appears in I
i have before me the decree. I
Niles’s Register, vol. 3/, p g
MEXICO-TOTAL ABOLITION OP SLAVERY.
O The President of the Mexican United States to the
fhc'year 1829 the onoi- ,
VP r«arv of our independence by an act of naliona
and beneficence that may turn to the advance
inent and support of so impor'ant a result; that may
consolidate more and more public tranquil'ty , ,
may co-operate to the aggrandizement of ttu P
he, and return to an unfortunate portion of
,an ta lhose rights which they hold from nature and
that I lie people protect by wise and equitable laws,
in conformity with the 30ih article of the constitutive
“ Making use of the extraordinary faculties which
have been granted by the Executive, I thus decree :
“ I Slavery is forever abolished in the republic.
“2 Consequently all those individuals who, until
this day looked upon themselves as slaves, are free.
n when the financial situation of the republic ad
mits the f roprietors of slaves shall be indemnified,
and the indeinnificition regulated by law.
“ And in order that the present decree may have
its full and entire execution, I order it to be printed,
pub'ished, and circulated to all those whose obligation
is to have it fulfilled.
“ Given in the Federal Palace of Mexico, on the
15th of September, 1829.
“ VICENTE GUERRERO,
“LAURENZO DE ZAVALA.”
This decree provided that the owner of slaves
manumitted should be indemnified when the
financial situation of the country would allow
it; and I have before me another act of the
Mexican Congress of 1837 upon the same sub
ject. This act I find in volume Bof the Laws
of Mexico, which embraces the acts ol 1836
and 1837:
[translation.]
“ An act abolishing slavery in the Republic. ”
“Art. 1. Slavery, without an exception, is, and
shall remain, abolished throughout the entire Hcpub
“Art. 2. The owners of slaves manumitted by this
act, or by 'he decree of 15th September, 1821), shall
be indemnified for the interest they held in them,
which interest shall be estimated by duly considering
the personal qualifies of the slaves ; to which end one
appraiser shall he nominated by the commissary gen
eral of the place, or by the person who supplies his
place ; another shall be nominated by the owner; and
in case of discord in their opinions, a third shall be
nominated by the constitutional alcalde of the vicini
ty, to which no objection shall be interposed. The
decision of the appraisers, or a majority of them, shall
be absolute and final. The indemnification of which
this article makes mention shall not extend in any re
spect to those colonists of Texas who have taken an
active part in the revolution of that department.
“ Art. 3. The original proceedings in regard to the
appraisement mentioned in the preceding article,
shall be given gratis to the owner, by whom they will
be presented to the Supreme Government, who will
give the orders to the Treasury Department to issue
the corresponding scrip for the respective value of the
property.
“ An. 4. The aforementioned scrip shall be paid or
satisfied in that mode which may appear to the Go
vernment the most equitable, conciliating as far as
practicable the rights of the individuals with the ac
tual situation of the Treasury. ” [April 5, 1837.]
From this I take it for granted that nobody
will deny that slavery was abolished in Cali
fornia and New Mexico at the time of their con
quest by our arms. If a slave at that time had
brought an action for his freedom against his
master before the courts of the country, does
any man doubt but that the courts under the
law then in force would have declared him to
be free? And as our Court has decided that
in all such cases the laws of the acquired terri
tory in force at the time of the acquisition shall
remain in force as the law of the place until al
tered by competent authority, can any man
doubt that they would decide the question just
as the Mexican courts would have decided it at
that lime ?
It is with nain 1 have heard allusions made
judges Irom the South, and lour from the
North ; and that, therefore, the question would
be safe for the South in their hands, as we had
a majority of the bench. I consider such an
argument a gross imputation upon the court;
and no greater disgrace could be attached to
the members of it, or to the country, than a de
cision made from any such considerations. No
judge, whether from the North or South, could
e*.er be influenced by such motives, until he
became as corrupt and as debased as the exe
crable Impey—the infamous tool of Hastings.
If I thought such motives could operate upon
the court, tnat would be the last body in the
world I would refer the decision of any ques
tion to. They should not decide upon the life
of my dog if I could prevent it. But while 1
am no advocate of referring any political ques
tion to the decision of that Court, I am never
theless bound to believe that they would decide
honestly to the best of their judgment. Such
1 believe have been the decisions to which I
have alluded. And after reading those deci
sions, can any man doubt as to how they
would decide the supposed case? I put the
question to the good sense and calm judgment
of the (louse.
Sir, it is useless to attempt to evade or get
round this point. It is not for me at this time
to say any thing about the correctness of those
decisions. That is not the subject now before
me or the House. It is my duty to know the
law as the court has decided it, and to let my
constituents know it likewise, and not to jeop
ard their rights by any such reference of them.
I Here Mr. Stanton, of Tennessee, asked Mr.
Stephens ifthe constitution of the United States
does not recog .ise slavery.]
Mr. Stephens continued. Yes, sir, the con
stitution recognises slavery, but only when it
iu not prohibited by the laws of the State, or
place, or for the purpose of protecting it there.
The constitution recognises slavery in Tennes
see and Georgia, and in all the States where
slavery exists by law; but it does not recog
nise it in New York or Ohio, or in any State
wiiere it is prohibited hy the law of the Slate,
except so far as it provides for the recapture ol'
runaway slaves. The constitution recognises
and guarantees slavery wherever it exists by
the local law, but it establishes it nowhere
where it is prohibited by law. The constitu
tion. as 1 have stated, expressly recognises
slavery, even when it is prohibited by the law
of the place, but only so far as to provide for
the recapture of a runaway slave. If my slave
escape and goes into a free State, the constitu
tion secures me the right of pursuing and re
taking him ; but if I voluntarily take mv slave
into a State where slavery by law is prohibited,
I have no right to retake him; he becomes
tree. No man will question this. And if slave
ry is prohibited by the local law of the newly
acquired territory, the only guaranty the con
stitution affords the slaveholder is the right of
recapture if he escapes and gets into those ter
ritories. The constitution. I say, fully and
amply recognises slavery where it exists, but it
establishes it nowhere where it is prohibited by
law. It is important that the public mind at the
South should not be misled upon this point.
The constitution no more establishes or carries
slavery into States or Territories where hy
law it is prohibited, than it establishes or car
ries any other right of a citizen which depends
upon the local law.
The constitution secures to all the citizens of
all the Slates and Territories of this Union the
right* to which they are entitled by the laws of
the place. If Virginia or Georgia should abol
ish slavery, the constitution would no more re
establish it there than it has re-established it in
Pennsylvania, New York, and other States
where it has been abolished. The constitution
no more carries the local law of slavery of any
State into a State or Territory where by law it (
is prohibited than it carries any other local law;
no more than it carries the law of interest upon
money, the statute of limitations, the laws of
distribution, or the penal laws of a State. And,
sir, if this compromise bill had passed, how <
could the master have been protected against 1
the theft or purloining of hia slave ? By what e
law would he have sued to recover him? By
what law would the sale and e /idences of title
in slaves have been determined ? Each of the
slave States Ins its own laws upon this subject.
And if the constitution carries the laws of the
Stales into these Territories, does il carry the
laws of all or any particular one? And if any
one, which is it ?
Mr. Speaker, this is a question too clear to
admit of argument.
Mr. Stanton again interrupted, and was un
derstood to say, the gentleman, then, holds that
it is within the power of Congress to extend
slavery into territory where hy law it does not
exist?
Mr. Stephens. My position, Mr. Speaker,
is this; That slavery is an institution which de
pends solely upon the municipal law of the
place where it exists ; and if it was prohibited
by law in tliese territories at the time of the
conquest, it cannot exist there until the laws of
the place be altered by the oompetent law
making power of the territory. In regard to
these territories and the rights of the South, I
hold that when the stipulations of the late trea
ty shall he complied with and the money paid
whioh is provided for in it, they will constitute
an acquisition, made at the cost of the common
blood and treasure of the whole Union, to
wards which the South contributed as gener
ously as the North, and in which the Sonth is
entititled to a just and equal participation ; and
that it is the duty of Congress to see to it, that
the just and equal rights of my sect on are guard
ed, protected, and secured by all necessary le
gislation. The right to acquire and to hold ter
ritory brings with it the duty to govern it. The
Supreme Court has so decided, and, in go
verniug, it is the duty of Congress to act justly
and fairly* towards the rights and interests ofall
who are entitled to an equal share in the com
mon domain. This. sir. is my position, and
upon it I shall stand or fall.
The same position. I see, was taken hy a
meeting ofthe Democratic party in the city of
Macon, in my own Stale, not lung since.
Amongst other resolutions, as I see in the
papers, they declared—
“ That our Senators and Representatives in Con
gress should see to it that the rights of the Southern
people should not be endangered during the period
the Territories shall remain under the control of the
United States, either from the continuance of the
municipal laws of Mexico or from the legislation of
the United Slates.”
I stand upon the principles ofthis resolution.
It is the true ground, in my opinion, for
Southern men to occupy. I shall never give
my sanction, while I have a seat upon this
floor, to any legislation on the part of Con
gress by which the rights of the Southern peo
ple to an equal and just participation in these
territories, while they remain as territories,
shall be endangered nor shall those rights ever
be endangered or surrendered, by my appro
val, by “a continuance of the municipal laws
of Mexico.” This compromise bill, sir, did, in
my opinion, endanger and surrender the then
rights of the South, by a “continuance of the
municipal laws of Mexico,” which were of
force at the time of the conquest, and by which
slavery was abolished there. Sir, I set out by
stating that I should not only challenge, but
defy, a refutation of my positions, and I now
repeat the same. The rights of the South are
not only endangered, but totally abandoned, in
this compromise. Its passage would have
been worse for the South than the Wilmot pro
viso in express terms; for, if the principles
upon which its Southern friends advocate it be
true —that is, if by the constitution the Southern
slaveholder has a right to carry and hold slaves
in these territories, notwithstanding the exist
ing municipal law of Mexico by which slavery
is abolished there, then, of course, the same
right would exist, even if the VViimot proviso
were passed: and the proviso, if passed, being
in contradiction of this constitutional right, of
course the Supreme Court would be bound to
decide it null and void. So that the compro
mise secures no rights to the South which they
would not have even under the Wilmot pro
pVevitself. Ktit. on the other halide if r the .Su
btil, decide against the slaveholder, on the
ground that the existing laws of Mexico, at the
time of the conquest, were in force there until
altered by some competent authority, then, sir,
we should be bound by il forever; for we
could not come and ask Congress to a'ter the
law against the compromise, even although the
Court might say that Congress had the piiwer
either directly to alter it, or to allow the terri
torial legislature to do it; for we all understand
that a compromise is a final settlement, and all
parties are bound in honor to abide by it.
Then, sir, what are we of the South to gain
by this compromise? Nothing but what we
would have, even with the Wilmot proviso—
the poor privilege of carrying our slaves into
a country where the first thing t o be encoun
tered is the certain prospect of an expensive
lawsuit which may cost more than any slave
is worth; and, in my opinion, with the abso
lute certainty of ultimate defeat in the end.
and with no law in the mean time to protect
I our rights of property in any way whatever!
This, sir, is the substance of the compromise,
i even in the most favorable view it can be pre
| seated ! And this is the security for the South
1 which I had the temerity to reject! Would that
the people of that section may ever have men
i upon this floor of such temerity! I did reject
1 it; and [ shall continue to reject all such favors.
Iff can get no better compromise, I shall cer
tainly never take any at all. As long as I have
a seat here. 1 shall maintain the just and equal
rights of my section upon this as well as upon
all other questions. 1 ask nothing more, and I
shall lake nothing less. All I demand is, com
mon right and common justice ; these I will
have in clear and express terms, or I will have
nothing. I speak to the North, irrespective
of parties. 1 recognise no parly association in
affiliation upon this subject. If the two par
ties at the North combine, and make a section
al issue, and by their numerical strength vote
d'*wn the Eolith, and deny us those equal
rights to which 1 think we are in justice en-
I titled, it will be fur the people of the rfotnh then
to adopt such a course as they may deem pro
per Ido not stand hereto make any threats
in their name, nor have I authority to commit
even my own constituents to any course of
policy. They must do that for themselves.
My commission here extends only to the
maintenance of their rights upon all questions
and measures that may come before mein this
House. And this [ shall do at all hazards. Nor
shall 1 be awed or intimidated in the discharge
of this high duty by any of the trembling alarms
of the official organ, that the “ Union is in dan
ger that, unless agitation upon this subject
is quieted, the “free soil movement” in the
North wilt sweep every thing before it and
that the Government itself will be endangered.
Such appeals may have their effect upon the
hearts of the timid. I am, myseif. not quite so
easily terrified into a surrender of my rights,
and those of my constituents. This editor,
however, or rather his master, would have ex
hibited much b *tter judgment, and a great deal
more patriotism, if he had shown a little more
foresight upon this subject. If the country is
environed by dangers and difficulties which
threaten its ultimate safety, it is the result of
his own reckless, lawless, and unconstitutional
measures; if an ominous agitation is felt by
all ; if the Government shakes to its centre ; if
the very pillars of the temple of liberty rock in
their places, he best knows what incendiary
hand—what Guy Fawkes collected and fired
the explosive elements. He may repeat until
doomsday , “ toe wash our skirts of all the con
sequences. ’ But he will find his skirts too
deeply stained to be so easily washed. This is
but the phrenzied ravings oflhe guilty Macbeth,
who, when in his distempered vision he fancied
he saw the ghastly spirit of the murdered Ban
quo, exclaimed—
“ Shake not thy gory locks at me,
Thou cans’t not say I did it.”
But this Government editor, nor the Presi
dent whom he serves, need nut suppose that be
cause he is trembling and quaking with fear, at
sights, spirits, or spectres dire, which the con-
scionsness of hi* own misdeeds cause to haunt 1
bis disturbed brain, that therefore everybody r
else feels the same unsteadiness of nerve with s
himself. I look upon this question now just as i
I did two years ago, when this war of conquest i
commenced. I raised my voice against it then, f
I saw what would be the result. 1 was pre- 1
pared for the present storm, with all its fury ; «
and lam as unmoved now’ as I was then. I
saw the northern Democrats snppoiting the
policy ofconquest for the purpose of acquiring '
free territory. I was opposed to the whole
policy because I considered it contrary to the
spirit of our constitution to wage a war of con
quest under any circumstances. But I was
determined then, if territory,should be acquired,
that the r ights of my section to an equal partici
pation in it should be secured, so far as my
ability could contribute to the accomplishment
of that and I stand upon the same ground
now ; and ( shall never surrender it so long as
the question is open. And no alarms about the
Union, or the ravings ofbrainless scribblers and
heartless demagogues, who croak and prate
upon subjects on which they are profoundly
ignorant, shall ever cause me to shrink from
the open and fearless maintenance of it, even
though i may stand solitary and alone.
I have no objection to compromising the
question, but I have only two plans ot com
promise ; one is, a fair division of the territory
by clear and distinct linos, by which every one
may know exactly to what extent his rights
will be protected. I care not much whether it
be by an extension of the Missouri line, or
whether it be by adopting as a line one of the
mountain ranges, giving the South all on this
side, and the North all on the other. 1 am,
however, rather in favor of the latter; hut shall
I insist upon some fair and just division. That
is one plan of compromise I shall favor, and if
I I cannot get that, I have but one other to offer,
and that is, to reject the territory altogether,
i Let us keep our money which is to he paid for
I it. and let Mexico keep her provinces and her
people.
Mr Polk, in his message, speaks of the late
treaty as the supreme law of the land. This I
consider as an intimation that this House, in his
opinion, will be bound to vote the appropria
tions to carry it into effect. If so. I barely in
tend here to say that I wholly disagree with
him. True, the treaty-making power is confi
ded in this country to the President and Sen
ate. But. sir, the President and Senate have
no right or power to make a treaty which im
poses an obligation on the part of the House of
Representatives to carry it into effect. This
principle I understand to have been fairly set
tled as the republican doctrine of 1796. 1
have the journal of the House of that year be
fore rne, and 1 find, on page 499, the following
resolution upon that point:
“Ist, Resolved , That, it being declared by the
second section of the second article of the Constitution
‘that the President shall have power, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties,
provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur,’
the House of Representatives do not claim any agency
in making treaties; hut that when a treaty stipulates
regulations on any of the subjects submitted by the
Constitution to the power of Congress, it must depend
for its execution, as to such stipulations, on a law or
laws to be passed by Congress; and it is the Con
stitutional right and duty of the House of Represen
tatives, in all such cases, to deliberate on the expedi
ency of carrying such treaty into effect, and to de
termine and act thereon as, in their judgment, may
be most conducive to the r üblic good.”
Upon the passage of this resolution the yeas
and nays were taken, and it was adopted by a
vote of 54 to 37. Every Republican in the
House, 1 think, voted for it. Amongst others,
I see the distinguished names of James Madi
son, Albert Gallatin, William B. Giles, Nathan
iel Macon. Abram Baldwin, and many others
The same principle has been settled by the
Supreme Court.
I have not time to enlarge upon this argu
ment now. I only intend to state the princi
ple and show the authority, that the country
may not be misled on this subject. The late
treaty is not the supreme law of this land yet
toft
ed us to appropriate the money; and when
he does, it will be (in the language of the reso
lution for which James Madison and ail the
other old Republicans in the House in 1790
voted) our constitutional right and duty to de
' liberate on the expediency of making the ap
propriations. And I now' slate that, if I ain
here when that appropriation is made, I shall
exercise this constitutional right, and I shall
never vote one dollar from the common trea
sure of this Union to pay for these territories,
if the institutions of my section are to he
wholly excluded from them. Nor will I vote
one dollar to carry this treaty into eflect, until
I have this matter settled, and what I consider
the rights of the South secured. And I believe
this is the great lever of the South upon this
question. Let the bill organizing Territorial
Governments he linked with the appropriation
of the money, and let tlie South present an un
broken from against paying a dollar, if iheir
institutions are to he excluded, and I shall have
some hopes yet of obtaining justice.
Now, sir, yon know something of the only
plans upon which I intend to compromise this
business. But, as I said before, if in all this I
should he defeated—if the South will not stand
with metlpon this point—if the combined vote
of* the North carry the Wilmot proviso then,
sir, it will be for the people of the South to take
their own course. But one thing I will say.
that I shall be with them in whatever course
they may take. Their interests are my interests,
their fortunes are my fortunes, their hopes are
my hopes, and whatever destiny awaits them
awaits me also.
And now, Mr. Speaker. I think that I have
conclusively shown that this miscalled compro
mise bill ought not to have received support
from any quarter, and particularly from the
South.
As I have but a few moments left, I will re
capitulate my positions, that no man may mis
take or misunderstand them. 3
The Ist is that by the hill the whole subject of
slavery in California and New Mexico, without any
legislation on the part of Congress or the territorial
governments, one way or the other, is referred to the
Judiciary to determine whether it can legally exist
there or not. ° 3
aM. That the constitution of the United States fully
recognises and amply protects the institution of slavery
where it exists by the laws of the State or place, but
it does not establish it any where, where by the laws
of the place it is prohibited, 3
3d. That California and New Mexico beimr terri
tories acquired by conquest, all the laws which were
in force there at the time of the conquest not incon
sistent with the constitution of the United State* or
the stipulations of the treaty of peace, o* which were
purely of a political character, arc, according to well
setiled principles, and the adjudications of our own
courts, still in force.
4th. That as slavery did not exist there at the time
of the conquest, but had been prohibited by express
law, the Supreme Court of the United States, to
whom the matter was to be referred in the last resort,
could not be expected, from the principles of numer
ous decisions already made, to decide otherwise than
that slavery cannot be protected there, until the ex
isting law abolishing it be altered by competent au
thority r
sth, and lastly. That these positions beirm ihcon
trovertible, the bill offered, as it was, as a °ompro- !
mise and a final settlement of the question amounted ’
to noting but a total abandonment and surrender of
the rights of extending the institution of the South to
those Territories. !
Renewal of Blockade at Buenos Ayrfs.— I
The arrival of the brig Hyder Ali. at New York
from Bucco, the 14th June, on the Rio de la 1
Plata, brings us the news that the blockade i
which the French had removed for three weeks t
from Buenos Ayres and Erzinado. was renew- I
ed on the 12th of June more strongly than ever
and that a heavy frigate was ordered to the ,
Bucco. Rosas would not allow vessels to load
at the above ports after discharging at Monte- d
video, and hence its renewal. of the r
American vessels, and in fact those of all na
tions. that discharged at Montevideo, either
went to Brazil fora clearance to Buenos Ayres
or in ballast to Rio Jainero. The U. S. brig a
Perry, the only American man-of-war in the
river, was at Buenos Ayres, rendering much
service to onr merchant vessels. The ll yder
Ali had been aided in coining away by the Per
ry, after having been tired into by the French,
at Montevideo. The Spanish fleet had all left g
for home —the Sardinian was expected to go 7
soon.
_ _ -
CHRONICLE & SENTINEL ,
BY J. W. & W. S. JONES. t
OAILI, TRI-WEEKLY «fc WEEKLY
OFFICE IN RAIL HOAD BANK BUILDING
TERMS —Daily Paper, per annum, in advance *-$lO
Tri-Weekly Paper, “ “ “ " *•
Weekly, (a mammoth sheet) “ •• 2
CASH SYSTEM.— In no case will an order for the i
1 per be attended to, unless accompanied with the
tiKney, and in every instancewhen the time for which
any subscription may be paid, expires before the re
ceipt of suds to renew the same, the paper will be
discontinued. Depreciated funds received at value in
this city.
AUGUSTA, GA:
THURSDAY MORSIMG, AUG. U, 1848.
WHIG NOMINATIONS.
For President of tlie United Stalest
ZACHARY' TAYLOR,
OF LOUISIANA.
For Vice-President:
MILLARD FILLMORE,
OF NEW-YORK.
For Representative from tlie Btli District:
HON. ROBERT TOOMBS.
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS.
Electors for the State at Large.
Dr. Wm. Terrell. | Seaton Grantland.
Electors for the Districts.
Ist. J. L. Seward, sth Warren Akin,
2d. VV.H. Crawford, 6th Asburv Hull,
3d. A. VV. Redding, 7th Y. P. King.
4th Wm. Moseley, Bth G. Stapleton,
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION.
Ist. Thos. B. King, sth. Jas. M. Calhoun,
2d Jas. S. Calhoun, 6th. Jas. VV. Harris,
3d. Allen F. Owen, 7th. .
4th. J. N. Williamson, Bth. Robert Toombs.
Mr. Stephens’s Speech.
Were an apology needed, we should offer
none for occupying so much of our space to
day with this masterly production of one of
Georgia’s most gifted sons—this eloquent and
powerful and conclusive vindication of himself,
and the rights and interests of the South. Lot
it be read —aye, let it be read and studied by
every voter in the South, and we venture the
prediction, that no unprejudiced mind in whose
bosom pulsates an American—a Southern—
heart, will fail to thank, sincerely thank, Mr.
Stephens for his vote on the Compromise, and
his speech in vindication of that vote. As an
argument in support of his positions, it is lucid,
cogent, logical and unanswerable, and no man
in either House of Congress, or out of it, will
attempt its refutation. The Southern demo
cracy in the House, after having asked the
privdege of a reply, did not dare to venture
upon the task, although “ challenged' 1 and
“ defied" to it by the speaker again and again.
—Kuuomcs of all the vituperation
which has been heaped upon the head of Mr.
Stephens by the ’gnorant and perverse dema
gogues by whom he lias been so wantonly as
sailed at the South, since his vole upon this
question? What becomes of the impotent
epithets of “ traitor’ and 11 culprit" and such
other slang, familiar to the vocabulary of im
becile party hacks who ignorantly or wilfully
sacrifice the dearest interests of the South at
the shrine of party ? What becomes of
the charge made against Mr. Stephens
of “ deserting and sacrificing the South and
its interests,’* made, too, by men who are
shouting hosannas in praise of James K. Polk
and Lewis Cass ?
It is true the South has been “ deserted' ’ and
her interests threatened with sacrifice, but it j
has been done by Mr. Polk, and Mr. Cass, one
of his prominent and principal advisers. They
are the Traitors ' —they the “ deserters ” —
they and they alone are responsible for thrust
ing this fire-brand, this agitator of the public
tnnquility, into the midst of the American
people ! They are the incendiaries—they are
the agitators—they are the men who, to satiate
their unholy Inst for dominion and the acquisi
lion of foreign territory, have endangered the
interests of the South, and rendered insecure
the tenure by which she holds her property I
In this position we are sustained by that able I
and eloquent Democrat, John A. Campbell, |
of Mobile, who, in concluding his series of ar
ticles on the Compromise bill, remarks :
“We have no wish to follow any further this sub
ject. The prospect that this result would ensue from
the war with Mexico and the introduction of terri
tories has been constantly before us. We have con
demned the President and ins advisers on account
of that war. We believe it to have originated in
their lust for the acquisition of California ; that it was
commenced by u violation of the constitu’ion ; that it
has been consummated bysome of the most daring acts
ot usurp ition of power known to our history ; that it
has ended in the presentation of questions which un
settle the laws of property in the Southern States,
rendering its tenure insecure, and infusing a want of
confidence in their stability, and which at last jeopards
the strength and power of the Union.”
Such is the verdict of the intelligent and re
flecting now of all parties and classes of so
ciety ; and an intelligent posterity will hand
down the names of these demagogues and
tricksters, and triflers with the institutions of
their country and the liberties of the people,
shrouded in infamy.
Hauling down the Cass Flag.
1 he Red River Republican, one ofthe oldest
Democratic organs in the State, published at 1
Alexandria, La., after a mature and dispassion
ate investigation ofthe principles of Gen. Cass,
with every disposition to approve them, has ]
come to the conclusion that he is unsafe for the ]
South, and repudiates the man and his princi-
pies. In an elaborate editorial setting forth his j
views, the editor says: t
“ The editor of this paper, having come to the de
liberate conviction that Gen. Cass is opposed to the 1
interests of the South, cant ot consistently with his du- I
ties as an independent man, advocate his claims to the a
Presidency. ” -* I |
But the editor stops not at repudiating Gen.
Cass and his principles—he not only hauls
down the flag of Cass and Butler, but he <
rears high that of Taylor and Fillmore— and ri
proclaims himselfready and willing to do bat- | ’
tie in their cause, as the cause of the country \
and the cause of the South ! j \
Election*. (
North Carolina.— We have returns from
ill but three counties, Manly, Whig, is about
157 ahead, and the three counties to hear from
*ave Gkaham, Whig, in J 844, a majority ol j
78 votes. The Legislature, like the Governor, i
is still in doubt.
Kentucky. —Mr. Crittenden's majority
will fall little short of Mr, Clay’s in 1844.
Missouri—We have a few returns, but no
thing definite.
Illinois. —A Whig loss of a Congressman in
Lincoln’s district is reported.
Indiana —The returns are not sufficient to
determine the result. *
lowa.—The result in a few counties only has
reached us.
Nothing from Arkansas.
- - - A
Gen. Cass Deserted.
The signs of the times are unmistakeable ,
that General Cass is to be deserted by his sup- i
porters at the South, upon the question of i
Slavery in the Mexican territories. Whether
he is to be abandoned altogether is not so clear,
at least by the party-hacks and office-seekers,
who would not long hesitate as to the propriety 1
of sacrificing every interest of the South at the
shrine of party. But there are none now, not
even we believe the Savannah Georgian, so
poor as to do his opinions on this grave ques
tion reverence No Southern man. in the lan
guage of the Constitutionalist, will assent to
confer upon the legislatu es of those territories
the power to regulate the institution of Slave
ry. How then can those people support Gen
Cass, in the face of their oft repeated declara
tion, that this question is paramount to all oth
ers ? How will they justify themselves to the
South for such a desertion of her interests and
rights, as their support of Gen. Cass convicts
them of?
A Nice Cass Man.
The Cassites of Alabama have a beautiful
specimen of an Elector for the fourth district of
■ that State, a Dr. Beckett, who recently made a
speechin Pickensville, Ala., the burden of which
was to prove General Taylor a Wilmot pro
visoist — a charge, ichich, the Republican says, he
admitted three times during his speech he did
not believe himself!
The only thing that astonishes us about the
fellow is, that he had not common honesty
enough to admit, and sense enough to know
that none of the audience believed the charge.
Veto of the Proviso.
The Columbus Times affects to be very
much concerned that Gen. Taylor does not
declare that he “ will or icill not veto the Wil
mot Proviso.” Would it not have been as well
for the Times to have manifested a little more
concern about Gen. Cass' opinions on that
question ? Has he ever dared to insinuate that
“he icill or will not ” veto the Proviso ? Does
the Times dare to espouse Gen. Cass’ opinions
on the subject of slavery in the Mexican terri
tories ? Will that print assert that the Territo
rial Legislature alone has power to admit or
prohibit slavery in those territories ?
Messrs. Hilliard) Stephens and Toombs
—Are expected to reach the city this after
noon bv the cars from Charleston.
Correspondence of the Chronicle <f- Sentinel.
Stone Mountain —Democratic Conven
tion.
This parasite on the Agricultural Fair has
mustered a goodly number of people of ah
parties and both sexes. The principal speak
ers are Hackett, Colqlmtt, Jackson, of Sa
vannah, and a gentleman from Montgomery,
Alabama. There was an interesting contest
among the Orators for the palm as to who could
relate the most anecdotes to raise a laugh, and
“tickle the ears” of the Democracy. For
stories bordering on the obscene as well as
vulgar, the Reverend Mr. Colquitt distanced
all competitors. Almost every sentence, no
matter to what it related, was polished and
suited to the taste of the speaker by the quali
tyingterrn, “nasty.” Thisand “Old Whitey,”
were the staples of a demagogue’s appeal to the
lowest passions, prejudices and antipathies
which exist in civilized communities. Mr.
Jackson dwelt on the want of principles in the
Whig party, and intimated that Mr. Cass’ prin
ciples, leaving the question of excluding slave
ry from Mexico, to the inhabitants thereof, were
just the thing for the South. No gentleman,
however, discussed the Cass platform at any
length. It was “ Democracy ” —“ Democra- |
cy ” —“ more territory ” —“ the triumph of the
Administration. ” Mr. Colquitt expressed
the confident belief that we “should, at no
distant day, have an ocean-bound Republic. ”
It was the subject of much complaint that the
Whigs had opposed the am exation of Texas,
and the conquest of a third of Mexico. The pro
gressive addition of the Canadas, and the free
States of Mexico not yet “annexed, ” seemed
to be the favorite policy of the speakers.
The spirit of aggrandizement animated the
audience, judging from the applause given to
the doctrine of enlarging the borders of the
Union—more than we were glad to witness.
It is a serious misfortune for a people not to
know when they have territory enough. If this
Government is doomed to fall, it will be through
the agency of aggressive wars, followed by
intestine fends and conflicts about a division of
the “ spoils of the vanquished. ” The acquisi
tion of foreign provinces in violation of the
spirit of the constitution, is now creating an
alarming sectional controversy.
The prospect for the Agricultural Fair is
good. The place is excessively thronged; and
the Democrats have got up a Barbecue to feed
the hungry, which is in good taste.
Acricola.
S'till they Come. —Wastiington Runkles,
Esq. publishes a card in the Westminster Car.
rdll lonian stating that he has “ heretofore acted
with the self-styled Democratic party of the I j
present day, but after mature reflection and i
cloise investigation of the principles of the two
parties, he has come to the conclusion to sup- (
port the naan that never surrenders, and use t
all honorable means in his power to elect to
the Presidency. General Zachary Taylor.” <
— t
For the year ending sth January last, the t
whole amount of die public expenditure of t
Great Britain was $296,000,000. Os this large
sum, $57,285,000 were expended in maintain
ing the army and navy upon a war-footing in s
a period of profound .peace. This exceeds the I
sum appropriated to the same object in 1835, £
by thirty-five millions of.doilars. tl
congressional proceedings
Correspondence of the flnUimorn Sun.
I n Senate Friday Night, Aug. }],
i>u motion of Mr. Benton, the bill ‘ to carry
into effect certain stipulations of the treaty be
tween the United States and Mexico, of 2d
February, 3848. providing for the adjudication
and payment ofclaims of citizens of the United
Statesagainst Mexico,” was lakenup and read.
Mr. Benton moved a proviso to the 2d s.-n
--tion, confining its provisions to those claim*
which shall have been liquidated and agreed to
by the commissioners on both sides, amounting
to about $900,000, to be paid out of the Treasu
ry, with six per cent, interest, though there
was, he said, another claim, amounting ( 0
about 300 000 dollars, which had been re
turned by only one set of commissioners. r f}. e
object of the proviso was to prevent the pay
ment of the latter.
Mr Johnson, of Maryland, wished to know
whether this claim of $900,000 was to be paid
with interest, out of the $3 250,000, provided*
by the treaty, for unliquidated claims, or out of
the treasury —whether this $900,000 would not
be charged by the treasury to the latter fund,
and deducted from the three millions and a
quarter, and the balance divided among tho.e
claimants whose claims had not been liquidated :
After further debate, and an amendment be
ing bj?re rejected, the question then recurring
on Mr. Benton’s proviso to the second section.
Mr. Badger moved to amend the proviso bv
inserting therein the words “ without interest.'
So that interest on the $900,000 shall not h ( >
paid.
The proviso of Mr. Benton was adopted.
Mr. Underwod moved to strikeout the words
in the 2d section, “together IHth interest oa tin
same.” Agreed to.
Mr. Johnson’s amendment was lost, and the
question was then taken on a -motion by M r .
Underwood to strike out the whole of the se
cond section, and it wes decided in the affirma
tive. Ayes 31, nays 7. So the section wac
stricken out.
Mr. King moved to strike out a portion of
the Bth section, and to insert so as to make the
section conform to a similar provision in the
treaty with Naples. Ihe amendment was
adopted.
Mr. Baldwin proposed an amendment, which
was rejected, and then the bill was read the
third time and passed, as amended.
Mr Wescott reported a bill to grant to Ala
bama and Florida lands for a railroad,* and it
was read by its title.
On motion of Mr. Dickinson, the Post Route
bill was then again taken up, the question be
ing on its passage.
Mr. Dickinson moved that it be indefinitely
postponed.
The motion to postpone was lost, and the
amendment allowing papers published weekly
to circulate throughout the State wherein they
are published, free of postage, was recoils: r
ed, and an amendment was proposed to limit
the distance within which they may so circi tv
free of postage, to a circle of 50 miles frou 'he
place of publication. This amendment was
rejected, and then the amendment itself, {< u
king them free within the State where pub* -li
ed,) was also rejected. The bill was then
passed. [And so the liberal measure in reg.i: !
to newspapers, to which I have referred, has
been defeated by an injudicious effort *o
modify.’] ....
The Army Appropriation bill was taken up,
and the Senate insisted upon the amendments in
which the House had refused to concur, and a
committee of conference was ordered.
Mr. Davis, from the committee on com
merce, made a report, accompanied by a reso
lution, requesting the Secretary of the Trea
sury to communicate, at the commencement
of the next session, all the information in his
possession in regard to the explosion o*‘
steam-boilers. Adopted.
The Senate then, on motion, at half-past 10,
went into Executive session, and soon after
wards adjourned.
House of Representatives.
The amendment of the Senate to the army
appropriation bill, appropriating $20,000 for
arrearages ofexpenditurps west of the Mississip
pi, and $200,000 for “liquidated” claims in
California, were non-concurred in, and then
the hill, with the action of the House thereon,
was returned to the Senate.
The House was then engaged for several
hours in a debate on the bill from the Senate
granting alternate sections of the public lands
to aid in the construction of (he Kalamazoo
(Michigan) Railroad,
The bill was passed, but the vote reconsider
ed, and after several motions was finally laid on
the table, 80 to 77,
At about 10 o’clock adjourned.
In Senate August 12.
After some unimportant business had been
disposed of, the Oregon territorial bill was ta
ken up—it having been returned from the
House, with the action of that body thereon,
in regard to the amendments of the Senate
Mr. Mason moved to lay the bill on the ta
ble. and the question being taken by yeas ami
nays, it was decided in the negative—lß t<> ‘2
Mr. Benton expressed his satisfaction that
the Senate had refused to lay the bill on the
table, and proceeded to show (he necessity of
providing at the present session a government
for Oregon. He asked Senators to reflect up
on the present condition of that territory, and
the delay which had already been permitted in
complying with their wishes. The world was
looking to this model republic, and were the
i Senate prepared to say that its machinery
should stop ? Had die motion to lay on the ta
ble succeeded, and no government been pro
vided for Oregon, he would have conceived
that a case had presented itself where the Pres
ident would he justified in exercising his pow
er. under the constitution, to call an extra ses
sion. He concluded, by moving that the Sen
ate recede from its amendments.
Mr. Berrien called on the Senate to voted" wn
tnis proposition, that a comrnuee of confer ne
might be appointed. Two questions had aris
en ; First, whether a government shall be pro
vided for Oregon ; and secondly, one more im
portant, whether the equality of rights between
the Stales shall be preserved If the iron rule
was to be adopted by the North, it would be
the duty of the South to resist. But let them,
nevertheless, have a conference committee, and
if nothing then could be devised in the way of
conciliation, let the unhappy consequences
which must result, rest where they should.
The two Houses had disagreed—let a confer
ence committee be now appointed, that they
may act in concert, whatever,they mightde
termine upon.
Mr. Calhoun had voted to lav the bill on the
table, not because he was opposed to a con
ference committee but because he could not
consent to an abandonment of southern rights
The prospect of a just settlement, he he
lieved, was gone—the vole on the b'll, in
House—the vote here this morning—showc 1 -
it. The South had showed every disposition
to compromise—and he would now say to di-
South that they had but one course to pu^ 1 '
—if the determination to deprive them ol hn
rights was persisted in—and that was tore-! 11
—to insist upon those rights.
This was not a territorial question —‘
a question of equality between the States- l:
ifthe south yielded their rights, they were 1
serving of the annihiliation which woui i 1
low, One side could not exclude the o '
without the grossest injustice, and subiim^ 1 '
could not be made without the grossest degr^ 1
tion. . e
In the compromise bill he had yieldei <
of their greatest arguments —that of e< l ua •' r[ ,
tice to all the States in regard to the.-e
tories—but he had done so, and left the qu - ,
to the Supreme Court, for the sake ol m
—for the sake of a settlement.
He felt very little solicitude about to*-
souri compromise, though he had voted
If they did not choose to give it to tnei -
South would stand i n regard to the su» J
they had stood before. »
