Newspaper Page Text
note to MR. CHAPPELL.
MACON, June 20th, 1850.
]lon. A. 11. Chappell:
g; r The undersigned friends of yours and lovers of the
I ‘ n jon having great confidence in your political opinions, de
pjre frojn you an expression of- sentiment for publication, in
reference to the great issues which arc now agitating the pub
lic mind, and more particularly as to the course of policy to
pursued in relation to the Compromise Bill recently introdu
ced into the Senate of the United States by the ljon. Henry
Clay, as Chairman of the Committee of Thirteen.
Will you be kind enough to furnish us with an exposition
ol'\our views at your caS “St convenience, and oblige
Yours, respectfully,
ABNER P. POWERS,
WILLIAM K. DeGRAFFENREID,
L. O. REYNOLDS,
ROBERT COLLINS,
ROBERT S. LANIER,
JAMES W, ARMSTRONG,
JOHN B. LAMAR.
MR. CHAPPELL’S REPLY:
(ienllenien : —I have given much reflection to the
note you addressed me on the 20th Lilt., desiring for
publication an expression of mjf sentiments On refer
ence to the great issues now agitating the public
mind, and more particularly as to the course of policy
to be pursued in relation to the Compromise Bill re
cently introduced into the Senate of the United
States, by Mr. Clay as Chairman of the Committee
of Thirteen.”
I will not disguise, gentlemen, that your recpiest has
given me considerable embarrassment. 1 have been
unable to repress the conviction that while a few par
tial friends like yourselves may feel an interest in
knowing my sentiments on the great political ques
tion of the day', yet that the mass of the public
will be quite certain to regard them with indiffer
ence. For there arc, I believe, but three classes
of men, whom the people recognize as having the
privilege of making demands on their attention;
those who arc in actual public service ; those who
are candidates for election to public trusts ; and those,
who, having served the country’ long, ably and ac
ceptably in high places, have become permanently’
endeared to the popular heart, and continue to be re
garded as a species of-cherished public property,
even after their retirement to the shades ot private
life. Whoever ventures before the public with his
sentiments on great political subjects unsupported by’
either ot these claims, is not ordinarily entitled to ex
pect much attention and will be more likely to en
counter (lie imputation ot presumptuousness, than to
obtain a thoughtful attention to the views which he
may advance.
These considerations gentlemen, had well nigh
determined me against complying with your deeply
appreciated request. But when 1 took another view
when 1 looked at the matter on another side, and
pondered on the momentous character oi the issues
on which you have asked an expression ol my r sen
timents. and saw too. what no man can open his
eves to things around him without seeing, that the
paramount, patriotic want ol the times in reference
to these issues, is a full, fearless and perfect freedom
and unreserve oi the Southern people in unbosom
ing themselves, and coming to a dear, frank, manly
understanding with one another, when i saw that
this was the distinctive, craving want of the times.
I felt at once that your call upon mo had crea
ted an occasion which did not leave me at liberty to
he restrained by any refinement ot delicacy’ lrom
performing my part, however humble, towards meet
ing a want which 1 regarded as so great and imper
ative.
1 proceed, therefore, without longer hesitation, to
the task of attempting to fulfil your request. And
in order to a just presentment ol my views in regard
lo ill*! existing crisis, it is necessary 1 should take a
glance at the events and influences out ol which it
lias grown. .
The annexation ol Texas led to the Mexican
war, the Mexican war resulted in *hc acquisition
of New Mexico and California, and this acquisition
gave rise directly to the great territorial quarrel
which now agitates and threatens the Union. I lie
annexation of Texas, tile war with Mexico, and the
acquisition of-Ncw Mexico and California were till
emphatically’ Democratic measures, i hey were,
moreover, peculiarly and eminently, measures of the
•Southern section ol the Democratic party. It can
never be forgotten how loth our Northern Demo
cratic brethern were to launch the country on the
stormy and uncertain ocean of the first ol that se~
ries of measures; nor how stoutly the whole body ot
Northern Whigs fought against it from first to last.
The Northern Democracy, however, yielded to the ur
gency'of their Southern political allies and conquer
ing their own strong reluctance, embarked tally with
us°in support of the great opening measure, the en
tering wedge of the series, the annexation of Texas—
a, measure which was. undoubtedly, the potent, pro
ductive cause, the prolific parent, ol all that follow
ed. They stood by us throughout, and by their aid,
we triumphantly consummated the whole ol that
stupenduous series ol measures, constituting a mass
of achievements which raised the character of our
country prodigiously, both tit home and abroad, and j
justly filled the Democratic party, and especially the
Southern portion ot it with boundless pride and ex
ultation.
Being thus the originators and authors of these
measures, a heavy moral and political responsibility’
rests on ilic Democratic party, and especially on
Southern Democrats, yi relation to their consequen
ces. If these measures, or their consequences shall
terminate in the dismemberment and overthrow oi
our great Republican Confederacy, deep shame and
accountability for the result, must under any’ circum
stances lie at the door ot the Democratic party'. But
the case will be rendered still worse it that party,
and especially the Southern branch of it. shall fan
to exert itself with the utmost sincerity and mtense
ness of patriotism, to prevent these, their measures
from w'inding up in the dire catastrophe ot Disunion.
Such guilty on our part, will tinge our
inevitable shame and accountability, in connexion
with the matter, with criminality ol the darkest dye.
For what can be more criminal, morally and politi
cally than to fail to use our utmost exertions to pre
vent disaster and rum from flowing from our own
measures. , , .
These facts and view's, gentlemen, do, in my opin
ion, powerfully concur with the general obligations
of patriotism, in summoning Southern Democrats, in
a most stringent and special manner, to the rescue
of their country from the dangers oi the present, cri
sis. It is a crisis mainly of their own creation—of
their own bringing about. It. was the Southern Dem
ocrats who forcecTthe annexation of Texas as a lead
ing party measure on the unwilling Democracy ol
the North. It was the Southern Democrats, like
wise, who, for the sake ol the annexation of Texas,
more than lor all other reasons put together, presen
ted the ever-to-be-honored James R. I oik to the
rather reluctant acceptance ot their Northern politi
cal brethren as a candidate for the 1 residency.
was for the sake and under the influence ot the
Southern Democracy that their Northern brethren
generously accepted and triumphantly sustained
both the measure and the man. And. to crown a .
it was a Southern Democratic Administration thus
brought into power by. the behest of the Southern
Democratic party', and zealously supported by that
party in all its policy and measures —it W’as such
an Administration that introduced the country in
to the Mexican War. and to which all the glories
and responsibilities ot that war. and ol the ac
quirement of New Mexico and California right
fully be lon o', and must forever cling. The Southern
Democracy have not failed exultingly to claim and
enjoy their full share of these clustering glories.—
They are far too magoiminous and just to disavow
or disregard the heavy attendant responsibilities.
Among these responsibilities it was clearly seen
and acknowledged beforehand, that the heaviest,
most difficult and fearful would be the settling ot
the strong sectional conflict between the North and
South which it w'as w'ell known would spring up out
of the question of allowing or disallowing slavery’ in
the territory that might be acquired from Mexico, by
means of the war. With this conflict in full and
certain prospect before its eyes, and with all the
weighty responsibility of settling it in full view, the
Southern Democratic party persevered —properly
and patriotically persevered in advocating and sup
porting the war and war measures, and in insisting
ona large cession of territory from Mexico, as the
condition on which peace should be made. The result
was made to coincide with their desires. We be-
came, by means of the treaty that closed the war.
masters of New Mexico and California.
And now in view ot these facts, and this undenia
ble history ot the case, a solemn question seems to
me to address itselt to every Southern Democrat. It
is this: Js it consistent with honor, with justice and
patriotism lor Southern Democrats now to take an
extreme stand, and to say that this dangerous conflict
which they have been thus largely instrumental in
bringing about, shall never be settled except on terms
of their own dictation? Is it consistent with honor,
with justice, with patriotism for them to take a stand
against all compromising of this conflict—or for them
Cven to take .heir stand doggedly on certain particu
lar terms of compromise, and proclaim that “these
at least we will have or, so far as in us lies. this glo- \
rious. peerless Union shall he blown to atoms” Let j
every Democrat ponder on these questions, and an
swer them to his own heart and conscience, and if
the response shall not be in fullest unison with honor, j
with justice, with patriotism, I will confess myself!
painfully mistaken in the character and tone of the j
political party with which lam connected. For my’- !
sell I have no hesitation in declaring my r profound i
conviction, that the above noticed undeniable facts of
Southern Democratic agency and instrumentality, in
bringing about the events and state of things out of
which the present threatening sectional conflict has
sprung, lays a peculiar and extraordinary weight of
obligation on the Southern Democratic party', to do \
its utmost to carry the country’ safely through the
perils ol that conflict. They are circumstances of
the most cogent nature, superadded to our general
duty’ as patriots, binding us by’ redoubled ties to be ac
tuated by a conciliatory spirit in this matter. They j
are circumstances which not only place our duty as i
patriots, but our point of honor as parties to a quar- !
rel, decidedly on the side of conciliation and compro- !
inise. 1 feel deeply assured that if Southern Demo
crats will but apply their minds to the calm, dispas
sionate study and review of the whole case. —they
must come to this conclusion—a conclusion which is
but an anticipation of the clear voice of history', and
the permanent judgment of mankind.
Turning now from the contemplation of the pecu
liar position of the Southern Democracy in reference
to this great territorial controversy, let us for a mo
ment advert to that of the national Democratic party
in relation to the same thing. It took the whole
Democratic party'of the country' —the Southern wing
ot it leading—the Northern aiding and co-operating,
to effectuate the vast measures which form the ante
cedents and sources of this controversy'. The whole
Democratic party is, therefore, under special obliga
tion. though some in a greater degree than others, to j
see that the country suffers no detriment from the |
consequences of what they have done. The Demo- j
cracy ot the North and of the South, as they united !
and acted together in achieving the great measures
of which New Mexico and California are the fruit —
are now infinitely more bound to unite and work to
gether to save the country lrom the disgrace and ruin
of being torn to pieces by intestine strife between the
North and South about the division of the conquered
territory. Yes! A deep, ineffable disgrace will it.
indeed, be. to have it written down and perpetuated
in history that the Democratic party, holding in its
hands the sway of national affars, did, by policy and
arms acquire immense territories lor the country, and
then meanly proved itself to be neither able nor will
ing to prevent that country from being dismembered
and destroyed by reason ol a quarrel growing out of
the acquisition!
Happily for itself and for the country, such a re
proach has not fastened itself on the Democratic
party, and I confidently believe, never -will. That
this portentous controversy has not ere now been sa
tisfactorily’ adjusted, lias been owing to no fault of
the Democrats as a party —to no want of wise, pa
triotic foresight, precaution and exertion on the part of
the true Democrats of the'Union, and their eminent
and trusted public men.
At an early moment after the treaty with Mexico,
Mr. Polk, as President of the United States, threw
the whole weight of his character and official posi
tion into the scale, in favor of an adjustment oil the
principle of extending tJic line of the Missouri Com
promise lo the Pacific ocean. This recommendation
was made in his message to Congress upon the return
of the Oregon bill with his signature. There was
every reason to hope that this basis of settlement
would he accepted by the eounlry. and particularly
by the South. For it had very recently received the
seal of renewed national favor and recognition, by
being incorporated in the resolution by which Texas
was annexed to the Union. Mr. Buchanan brought
his unsurpassed reputation and weight of character
us a statesman, and as a great man, and a great
minded catholic patriot, to bear upon public opinion
in concurrence with Mr. Polk’s views. And thou
sands upon thousands of the best Democratic minds
and hearts in the country', were in unison with theirs
—and the great mass of the party would undoubtedly
have readily moved in the same direction. But there
were not a tew, and among them men of mark, both
in the North and South. who were restrained from
concurring with their brethren, by strong, and appa
rently insurmountable scruples. They regarded the
Missouri Compromise with stern disfavor, as being a
sort of bastard engraftment on the constitution, rather
than as its legitimate filiation and offspring, and they
thought it high time to put it under the ban. The
great deceased Carolinian, John C. Calhoun, figured
at the head of those in the South, who were distin
guished by this feeling, and who. aside from the con
stitutional difficulty, were irreconciliabiy averse to
the principle of the virtual exclusion by act of Con
gress of the people of an entire section of the Union,
lrom a fair participation in every portion of the nation
al domains.
To obviate these scruples and devise a platform
on which all might confidently and conscientiously
stand. —Gen. Cass determined to go back to the very
fountains of the constitution. lie did so, and in his
celebrated Nicholson letter, laid down the broad
doctrine of lotal noninterference by Congress with
the subject of slavery in the Territories. Here we
behold what, it would seem, ought to have been a
basis of reconcilement solid and ample enough to
satisfy all minds but those fixed immovably in favor
of a Congressional inhibition of slavery. And it
did satisfy and unite an overwhelming proportion of
the Democracy, both of the North and South. They
adopted it as their grand party platform, and rallied
upon it alike for carrying the Presidential election,
and for settling the Territorial Question. The
Democratic party understood well what it was doing
when it adopted this platform. It well understood
that, whilst-it was thus doing justice and seeking to
give satisfaction to the South, it was sacrificing
itself at the North to the tunc oi’ thousands, and
tens of thousands of votes. And it looked, and had
a right to look to the South for compensation, for
this heavy patriotic loss —a loss incurred for the sake
of the South. But it looked in vain. More than
half the Southern people, embracing the whole V\ big
party, and enough Democrats to turn the scale in ]
three or four Southern Democratic States, (Georgia
being one of them) voted against Gen. Cass and ef
fected his defeat, and that of the national Democratic j
party.
Thus was forever lost to the South, by her own •
deliberate fault, a priceless, irrevocable opportunity
of securing a benign settlement of this matter
through the happy, constitutional medium of the Bal
lot Box. Thus did the people of the South by their
votes work the overthrow of the National Candi
date and party who were their friends on this subject
and who, had they been placed in power, would have
undoubtedly brought about a satisfactory adjustment
of it! And still more and worse did the Southern
people do. They not only rejected their friends,
but by their votes they put their known enemies in
power. They put the reins of government in the
hands of Zachary Taylor, and the Northern Whig
party who were, and are. our enemies on this ques
tion.’ The arms of the South, on the'great battle
field of the last Presidential election, were beheld
strangely gleaming in ranks hostile to her cause, and
powerfully helped to win a crushing Waterloo
Victory against herself. So gigantic and astound
ing an instance of madness and folly, in the exercise
of the elective franchise, history has never before
had to record against any people !
It is in vain, utterly in vain, for a people who have
been guilty of such misconduct towards themselves,
to expect to escape all the penal consequences due
to their criminal fatuity. Heaven would be neither
wise, just nor severe, nor wisdom better than lolly,
nor right than wrong, if it were allowed to be so.
But, when such a deed has in fact been done by a
people, when they have irrevocably committed such
an act of madness and folly, how shall they repair tt.
How shall they go about making amends for it, or
arresting or mitigating the consequences of it ?
This is the great practical question which presses
painfully on us of the South now.
Undoubtedly, when a people have eeen guilty oi
such an act of madness and folly, they are not at
liberty to undertake lo repair it. or to gel away from
?i? i I? leasii ‘ si i n fiy
EXTRA s Macon, Ga. July 6th, 1850.
the consequences of it, by rushing to ‘hr commission
of another act of equal or greater vt ess or Jolly.
Undoubtedly, in the present case, tin [ eople of the
South are not at liberty to attempt to repair their
own miserable misdoing and self sacrifice in regard
to the Territorial Question, by resorting to the ]>er
petuation of a still greater misdeed, of which the ef
fect will be our exclusion from the Union, without
any tendency whatever towards giving a remedy or
redress for our exclusion from the Territories .—
Undoubtedly, after recklessly throwing away as we
have done, the all-sufficient, orderly, legitimate
remedy oi the Ballot Box, we are not at liberty to
undertake to compensate ourselves for the effects of
that unsurpassed fully by adventuring upon a course
of stupendous folly and wickedness combined. And
it would he a course of stupendous wickedness as
well as folly for Southern men, having a full view of
all the past and present circumstances of the case,
deliberately to make the existing Territorial contro
versy the basis on which to plant the lever ot machi
nations, for the overthrow of the Union, if this
glorious Union must indeed he broken up, and by
Southern .action too. —let it be on some oilier ground,
some other quarrel; not on that! Let it be on some
ground, some quarrel which we are not responsible
Ear, not culpable for. If we must, indeed, tear
tlown the piliars of our noble Federal Temple, let
us at least go about the sad work with clean hands
and blameless minds. Let us be executioners of the
deed, without being partakers of the crime ! Let not
the ruins of the subverted fabric of the Union over
whelm us with dishonor and remorse, as well as with
calamity.
What part, then, ought we of the South now to
act ? The answer seems to me exceedingly plain.—
We ought to acta part which will throw the weight
ol the South with the greatest effect, in favor of a
prompt and judicious settlement of this quarrel.—
And in order to act that part, we must co-operate
with the friends, not the enemies of conciliation and
settlei^nt.
To file honor of the Southern Whigs, as a party
they are found pursuing this eoursc. They commit
ted a great and ever to be deplored error, in placing
Gen. Taylor and the Northern Whig party in power.
They any now striving to redeem that error, to con
line within the narrowest possible limits the danger
and detriment to the South, and the Union which
that error has so powerfully operated to produce.—
They are lound generally renouncing President
Taylor’s policy so dear to Northern Whigs, Free
Soilers and Abolitionists, and rallying under the op
posing banner, and following the great souled
patriotic lead of their illustrious old chief, Henry
Clay. And with them the noiilc Spartan band of
Northern Democrats who still cherish justice and
friendship towards the South, arc evidently disposed
to co-operate, and it thry shall tail so to co-operate,
it will, in all probability, be more owing to alenia
tiott and resentment, at the contrary course of South
ern Democrats, than to any other cause.
The question, t hen. comes back with increased
pungency:—W hat is the duty'of Southern Demo
crats? What ought they to do?
It is very plain what would have been their duty,
and what they would have done, in case the Demo
cratic party had not lost the Presidential election, and
witu it the power to carry out their well understood,
fully avowed policy on this subject. But for the oc
currence of this vvoful and unhinging mishap, the
duty ot the Democratic party, Northern and South
ern, would have been to organise territorial govern
ments. an the non-intervention principle , for all the
territories acquired from Mexico, Caliibrnia included.
From this duty there would have been no escape or
attempt at escape; and it would ere now have been
fully and faithfully performed. General Cass, as
President, would have recommended it to Congress—
and his Northern Democratic supporters in both
Houses would have stood shoulder to shoulder with
Southern Democrats in the performance of this duty.
Southern Whig members would not have been
disposed, nor would they have dared, to withhold !
their co-operation—and thus the prompt and easy
passage oft lie measure would have been secured be
yond all shadow of doubt. i
But General Taylor was elected President, and the
act of the people in electing him. and the results of
his policy and management since his election, have
greatly changed the duty of the Democratic party,
and of Southern Democrats also, by interposing a
manifest impossibility to carrying out the original
Democratic programme in relation to the territories.
Through his management and influence, and that of
his Cabinet, California has been led to organise a
State government; and hacked by his recommenda
tion, she is now knocking at the door for admission
into the Union, with an interdict in her constitution
against all slavery within her limits. And it is con
ceded on all hands that it would be a hopeless and
impossible thing to attempt to refuse her entrance and
remand her back to a territorial condition. We are
compelled consequently to give up California as a
territory. She is lost, irretrievably, as a satellite to
our system, and can henceforward belong to it only as
a star in the grand constellation of States. Possibly
we may, by well-directed efforts and judicious co
operation with the friends of measures of conciliation
and concord, succeed in procuring a salutary curtail
ment of her enormous boundaries. J>iven this however,
there is little chance so it would be wild to
think of.
But although California is thus lost to us, and lost
by no fault or misdoing of the Southern Democratic
party, yet there is nothing whatever in the fact or
circumstances of that loss which can operate to ex
onerate Southern Democrats from the full and faith
ful performance of all that part of their original duty
in relation to the territories that yet remains possible
to he performed. New Mexico still remains—the
newly proposed territory of Utah remains—both
claiming, and ready to receive at our hands, territo
rial governments upon our own cherished non-inter
vention principle. Our duty in regard to these terri
tories is certainly not at all done away or lessened
because Gen. Taylor has rendered it impossible for
us to perform the like duty in regard to Caliibrnia. —
On the contrary, that duty is even heightened by the
course .which Gen. Taylor lias pursued in relation
to California, and the policy which ho is now urging
in reference to the other two territories —which policy
unblushingly proposes to withhold from them civil
and political organizations, and to treat them ns out
casts from government, in order by such treatment to
drive them to a speedy imitation of the example of
California, and to a like irregular and obnoxious claim
for admission into the Union.
The duty, then, of Southern Democrats in relation
to these territories remains entire, it is a duty to
organise territorial governments for them on the basis
of Congressional non-interference with the subject of
Slavery within their limits ; it is a duty to save them
from suffering, for a long and indefinite period, the
wretched fate which Gen’l Taylor’s heartless and
unscrupulous policy of Governmental non-action and
abandonment would inflict upon them ; it is a duty to
rescue them, moreover, from being made, what that
policy would undoubtedly make them, a long contin
uing, effective staUdng-horse of anti slavery agitation;
and, above all, it is a duty summoning them to the
rescue of the South, and of the Union, from the tre
mendous disasters in store for them both, from the
rapid spread of Abolitionism and bitter sectional
hatred consequent upon such agitation.
Such arc the manifest and imperative duties of
Southern Democrats in the present critical and alarm
ing state of things—duties of which I am utterly un
able to see how they can effectually acquit them
selves otherwise than by earnestly co operating with
those who show themselves deeply penetrated with a
sense of the same duties: with such men as Clay,
Webster, Dickinson, Atchison, Mangum, Cass and
Foote, all those Northern and Southern Democrats
and Southern Whigs, aye, and Northern Whigs, too,
if any such there be, who are working hard for the
performance'of all these duties—who are laboring to
compose the strifes of the country, to heal its feariul
wounds, and to restore it once more to a state at
which the patriot need neither blush nor tremble.
It is only by such a co-operation, 1 repeat, tve can
at all acquit ourselves of these duties. Certainly
we cannot do it hy siding, whether actively or pas
sively, with Gen. Taylor and his followers in this
matter, who are seeking to carry out a policy which
sets all these duties at naught. As little can we do
it by siding with those who, in their blind rage at
General Taylor’s too successful legerdemain in re
gard to California, are bent on pursuing a course
which, without the least prospect of defeating the full
realization of that part of his plan which relates to
California, w II absolutely ensure the success of that
other part which relates to New Mexico and Utah.
The bill reported by Mr. Clay, as Chairman of the Com
mittee of Thirteen in the Senate, is the great antagonistieal
plan to that of the President and his cabinet, and to the
schemes and views of the Northern A\r.ig£>, I ree-soilerr and
Abolitionists. If it .fads, they must necesanly triumph
i If it succeeds, they are as necessarily defeated and ever-
thrown. Such is the real unsliunnable alternative which the
case presents.
Let us then look dispassionately at that bill. The un
doubted excellence, the exalted patriotism of its objects, en
title it at least to a fair and liberal examination before it is con
demned and rejected.
It is impossible, I apprehend, to deny that it is a bill which
contains much that is good—and good of the highest kind.
It is equally impossible to deny that it will prevent much that
is evil, and evil of the very worst kind.
In the first place, it is a marked ingredient of good in the
hill, that it makes provision for the organization and govern
ment of the Territories of New Mexico and Utah. The atro
cious contrasted wrong and evil which it will prevent, and
which so deeply stains the opposing cabinet plan, is the leav
ing of the people of these Territories for an indefinite length
of years without the protection of government and laws, to be
a miserable prey to civil anarchy, military despotism and bar
barian outrage. Every day that this state of things is allowed
to last, is a continuation of the most crying, merciless, discred
itable injury and injustice, on the part of our government, to
wards this portion of our fellow citizens. It constitutes a case
of the most remarkable governmental pravity and abandon
ment of duty, that was ever known. It involves a breach of
the faith of treaties, of the obligations of the Constitution, and
of the sanctity of oaths, all of which unite to demand in thun
der-tones of the President .and Congress, to give to the peo
ple of New Mexico and Utah, the benefits and protection of
civil government and laws. Mr. Clay’s bill proposes to dis
charge this most solemn and imperative duty. The antago
nistic Presidential plan, proposes to set this duty at naught,
and to abandon these Territories for an indefinite length of
time, to all the miseries and wrongs of their present anarchi
cal and unprotected condition. M ill Southern Democrats—
will Southern men of any party pursue a course which eftee
tiiHlly helps and enables Gen. Taylor and his cabinet, to carry
out such an atrocious policy ? This is one of the questions
which they must answer by their course in this matter. For
to help to defeat Mr. Clay’s bill, is to help most efficiently to
carry out Gen. Taylor's system of govcrmental non-action and
abandonment of duty, in regard to the Territories. That sys
tem goes into effect if the bill is defeated—it vanishes into
nothing if the bill is passed.
Another prominent and undeniable merit which Mr. Clay's
bill possesses, is to be found in the rejection of the M’ilmot
Proviso, and in the feature it contains of Congressional non
interference with the subject of slavery in the Territories.
Those Southern men who refuse to recognize this as a great
and satisfactory merit in Mr. Clay’s bill render very poor ser
vice to the Southern cause. They contribute to weaken and
demoralise the South in her own eyes and in the eyes of tlie
wliole country, by stirring up dissatisfaction now against what
the Southern people clamored for, only two years ago. Let
us beware, now that the position we contended for in 1848—is
sought to be conceded to us, how we turn away grumbling
irom the offer, and insist upon another position we then repu
diated. How downward is the tendency of such a course!
And how certainly are those who pursue it destined to sink
the character of patriots in that of faetionists !
The bill has a stiff further merit in connection with the mat
ter of slavery. It is not only marked throughout all its pro
visions, by the entire abstinence of Congress to legislate in ri -
lation to slavery, but in order to make absolutely sure of
►Southern approval in this particular, it expressly denies to the
Territorial government the power to pass any law prohibiting
or establishing it; thus leaving the question of slavery in the
Territories in the hands of the judiciary where the celebrated
Clayton Compromise bill of 1848—over the loss of which the
Southern people so poignantly grieved, sought to put it. Sure
ly, then, it cannot be that Southern men and especially South
ern Democrats, will pronounce Mr. Clay’s bill unsatisfactory
on the of slavery in the Territories.
Again, the great and, so far as I am aware, the only point
ot honor urged or made by the South in connection with this
controversy,has been that Congress should not make a discrimi
nation against the Southern people, by passing a law in re
straint of their right to emigrate with their peculiar property,
to territories acquired by the common blood and treasure of
the whole country. Such a discrimination it was felt and in
sisted, would be not less a wound upon Southern honor and
equality thau an infraction of Southern rights. This point of
honor is saved to us—saved, complete and inviolate by Mr.
Clay’s bill.
And yet further:—The passage of Mr. Clay's bill, in con
junction with the opinion prevalent throughout the South,
that, in the absence of all Congressional or Territorial legisla
tion to the contrary, the Southern people would be entitled in
point of law to carry their slaves into the Territories—the pas
sage, I say, of this bill in conjunction with this prevailing opin
ion, would make Southern men feel secure in emigrating
thither with their slaves. And if there he adequate induce
ments presented by the soil, climate, and productions, mineral
of agricultural, of the country, they will so emigrate to it,
and plant Southern influence there, and in due time bring the
States there to be formed, into the Union as slave-holding
States.
In strongest contrast with .all this, is the course which
things must take if the bill is defeated and Gen. Taylor’s
policy of non-action and abandonment of the Territories to
an unorganized and lawless state, supervenes in its place.
In that ease, the whole world knows that there will be no
immigration of Southern slave owners with their property.
For men owning any kind of permanent or valuable property,
especially slaves in the South, to the absolute* security of
which they look for the maintainanee of their families and a
provision for their children, will not risk it in a land destitute
of the protection of civil government and laws. In such a
land the needy, lawless, the outlawed and the desperately ad
venturous, will mainly congregate. Sueh will be tiie charac
ter of the population, that under the system recommended by
Gen. Taylor, will at some distant day frame constitutions and
governments, and ask for admission into the Union for New
Mexico and Utah. And sueh a population, owning no slaves
and looking merely to the appropriation of the country and its
government and honors to themselves and others of their own
sort—will be sure to shut out Southern slave-owners, by an
interdict in their State Constitution, as the Californians have
done.
The Northern M'higs, Free Soilcrs and Abolitionists, who
are supporting Gen. Taylor's non-action policy, understand
well what will be its operation. They know that it will, in
the end, certainly throw New Mexico and Utah into their
hands — as the President’s active policy has already thrown
California into their hands—and so they be but sure of get
ting the substantial thing which they want, they are not
over-nice or particular about the process by which it shall be
done.
M'ill Southern Democrats, will Southern men of any party,
pursue a course which amounts to giving them effectual and
decisive aid for achieving such an end by such means ? They
will be pursuing such a course if they co-operate with them
ill causing Mr. Clay's bill to be rejected.
It is another important merit of the bill, (or rather it is a
necessity from which the bill could not escape,) that it seeks
to provide far the settlement of the disputed boundary between
New Mexico and Texas. This branch of the bill is insepara
bly incident to the great object of organizing a territorial go
vernment for New Mexico. For, in order to-the organization
and working of a Territorial government, measures for set
tling this disputed boundary, arc indispensable, unless we
would have Congress to be guilty of the wickedness and in
sanity of organising a territory for the purpose of making it a
wide and revolting arena of governmental collision and war
fare with a neighboring state.
It has already been ascertained by a decisive vote of the
Senate, that it is wholly impossible to pass a bill recognizing
and confirming the vast length of Western boundary claimed
by Texas, stretching from the mouth to the source of the Rio
Grande del Norte, and thence due North to the 42d parallel
of latitude. Probably Texas herself, would regard as a most
unhappy circumstance, the permanent engraftment on her po
litical body, of the immense, barren proboscis to which she
; now lays claim, projecting up so far to the North and partak
ing of her vitality to little other purpose than that of provok
ing upon her perpetual hostilities and incursions from numer
! ous tribes of savages.
According to the imperfect attention I have given to the
subject, 1 am inclined to think she best boundary between
New Mexico and Texas, would be a line quitting the del Norte
at a point some sixty miles above the town ot El Passo, and
j stretching from thence to Red River, along the Southern
margin of the Great. Desert of the Journey of Death, throw
ing that Desert entirely into New Mexico. Such a line would
give Texas all the territory in that direction that can possibly
|be desirable to he.*. For giving up herclaka to the territory
1 North of that line, the ought to receive an ample equivalent,
and so the bill provides. Thir part of the bill ought also to
be wholly disentangled from the slavery controversy, by a pro
vision expressly recognising and perpetuating tlie Missouri
Compromise Line, as laid down and established in the Te xas
Annexation Resolutions —winch, I believe, has been done by
an amendment introduced for that special purpose.
After all, this whole branch of the bill amounts to nothing
more than making an overture *o Texas for the settlement of
the boundary. And in the perfect freedom which Texas will
possess of accepting, rejecting or modifying the terms offered
by the bill, we have ample security that nothing detrimental
to the great interests of the South, will bo allowed to be con
summated.
Such are the undoubtedly good provisions which the Ter
ritorial bill of the Committee of Thirteen, contains —provi-
sions which Congress is clearly bound to enact —the enact
ment of which is a duty of the gravest kind—a duty which it is
no light thing for American Congressmen and especially
Southern members and Southern Democrats, to omit to per
form. Yea! more! It is a duty so grave and imperative, so
binding on their souls and consciences, that they are bound to
use their utmost exertions, to exhaust all the constitutional
means in their power, for its full and effectual performance.
On this point it does not seem to me that there can be any
ground of doubt. And if the bill contained no other provi
sions but these, it would have easily united the suffrages
alike of Whigs and Democrats of the South.
It was a deep and over-ruling sense of the solemn duly of
carrying into effect the measures contemplated by these pro
visions that actuated those Senators who co-operated to unite
them together in the same Bill with another measure, —that
for the admission of California into the Union as a State.—
The joining of them in the same Bill with that measure, was
resorted to ns a means of affecting their passage, and as the
only means by which it was believed it could be effected—and
for no other reason.
The Senators who thus co-operated and who were so pro
foundly peentrated with a conviction of the overwhelming
character of the duty of enacting these provisions, on looking
around to ascertain what were the prospects for success, were
struck with grief by the discovery that their utmost endeavors
were doomed to certain defeat, incase these provisions were
left to depend for their passage on their own mere and unaided
strength in Congress. This melancholy discovery made a
deep impression on their minds, but was far from making
them feel that they could be justified in leaving these provis
ions to the fate which was seen certainly to await them, as a i
separate and disconnected measure. On the contrary, they i
felt it to be their duty to cast about for some warrantable le
gislative expedient to strengthen them and give them abetter
chance of sueeess.
After long debate and great deliberation, and strong oppo
sition, they adopted such an expedient. They beheld lying
beneath their hands, on the Senate table, a separate Bill for
the Admission of California—a measure known to possess a
very plethora of strength—troops of zealous friends—large
and determined majorities in both branches of Congress. —
They beheld In it a measure, which was conceded on all hands
to be absolutely certain to pass by a decided vote, and a mea
sure which they believed to be strong enough to carry along
with it on its back those other weaker measures, w liicli these
Senators had so much at heart—the Bill for the organization,
on the non-intervention principle, of the Territories of New
Mexico and Utah, and that, also, for the settlement of the
Now Mexico and Texas Boundary question.
Under these circumstances, what did they do?- Why,
they did what was no new or questionable thing in parliamen
tary tactics and practice. Senators who were the friends,
and Senators who were the enemies of the measure of the
admission of California, united to throw it into the same Bill j
with those other measures, in order that its strength might be j
made to aid their weakness and carry them safely through
Congress. In other words, they laid hold of the fleet an i
strong-limbed California admission steed, that was deemed cer
tain to pass triumphantly through the Congressional lists, and
determined to make him do some good service, if possible, to
the country, as lie passed—determined to make him serve a<
a paek-liorae to carry through along with himself the whole
load of our favorite Southern measures connected with the
Territorial controversy.
Those measures are known to be too weak to carry them
selves through by their own unassisted strength, and in fast
ening them to Gen. Taylor's California Admission measure,
Southern members of Congress are not. by any means, ma
king themselves chargeable with the blame and responsibility
of that measure, but are merely using it as an engine to drag
through their own better, though weaker measures.
“The very head and from of their offending,
Hath this extent, no more.”
Admitting, what I’ do not see how any man can successful
ly deny, that it was foul play on the part of the Administra
tion to lbist upon the turf this powerful California Admission ,
measure, chousing us of the Swutli so adroitly out of our
cherished non-intervention policy in reference to California—
admitting this, I say, to be so, there is certainly nothing in such !
a fact to entitle either the powerful steed or his patrons and j
abettors, to any favor or exemption at our hands. And it
would be a very great favor to them—one highly promotive of
their dearest schemes and wishes, for us to throw off’ the
weighty Southern measures which have been fastened on the j
back of their steed,or for us to let him fail, for want of due I
7 • i
application of whip and spur, votes and voices on <>ur part, to
carry that load of measures successfully through. For the
question is not whether lie shall go through or not go through.
It is certain he will go through, in spite of us; and the real
and only practical question is, whether he shall go through j
with our load of measures on his back, or without them, and to j
their utter and hopeless loss. For once let it be settled in ;
any way that he shall not or cannot go through with them, !
and then, relieved of that load, he will fly around the track ‘
on hoofs of winged speed, bringing California into the Union ,
as a separate measure with her enormous boundaries, her ir
regularities of organization and her* constitutional interdict of
Slavery; and leaving New Mexico and Utah unorganized, the
New Mexico and Texas Boundary question unsettled, leaving
the whole mighty mass of Congressional duties in relation to
these Territories unperformed, and without tin* chance or pros- ,
pect of performance—leaving, for years to come, those territo- j
ries fruitful, in scarce any thing else, to be putrescently fertile j
liot-bedsof Govermental collisions, sectional animosities, An
ti-Slavery agitation and Abolition propagandism—with the
certainty at last of coming into the Union like California, with
an Anti-Slavery Constitution; if, indeed, the Union shall not,
ere then, perish on the rooks of the very controversy which
these Territories will thus serve to exasperate and perpetu
ate, and from which there is not patriotism enough in the
North or the South, the East or the West, to extricate tho
country.
All this we are asked to hazard, all this wo arc asked to
lend ourselves to the probable bringing about, all this we are
asked to render ourselves deeply, culpably responsible for, if it
should come about. And for what ? Not because by doing
thus, we should have a prospect, on which a reasonable man
would incur a heavy hazard, of gaining what we want, in
whole or part. Not because we would thereby obtain a pros
pect of releasing ourselves from provoking and disastrous
consequences, which are traceable to causes in which wc have
largely participated, and for which wo arc largely responsible
as a people; but simply because we have grave objections
which we will not surmount, to voting for a Bill containing a j
provision for the admission of California, although all its oth
er provisions are precisely what we approve and what the j
country wants, and although the Faseage of the Bill is the
only probable measure of peace, conciliation and adjustment ,
that we can hope to obtain for our distracted and endangered 1
country.
I am fully sensible of the force of the objections to the Ad- j
mission of California. They are objections founded on the
enormity of her boundaries —her unpreparedness to be a
State—the gross irregularities attending ber organization as a
State Government, and the unfair and inadmissible means
employed to cause her precipitately to form a State Govern
ment and adopt an Anti-Slavery Constitution. Ido not men
tion as one of the objections, the mure fact that such is the
character of the Constitution she has adopted. That would
be sanctioning the monstrous principle maintained by the
celebrated Missouri Restrictionista of 1819, ’2O, who contend
ed that when a State was applying for admission into the Un
ion, Congress had a right to scrutinize the character of the pro
visions or permissions of her constitution on the subject of sla
very, and to make them the basis of her admission or rejec
tion. Such a principle, asserted by the North, shook the con
federacy to its foundations, thirty years ago. The bare re
miniscence of that er3 will be enough to keep forever fresh
the stigma tliat rests on that most dangerous and abominable
| doctrine.
In rpferer.:*, however, to any and every objection that can
j be urged against the admission of California, it is obvious that
California herself ought to be dealt with ill the most tender
and liberal manner. She has been from the beginning to th.#
present hour, tlie party “more sinned against than sinning .”
We refused to give her what she most pressingly needed, most
earnestly desired —what we were bound by tlie most sacred
obligations to give her —a territorial Government. \\ e lefY
her to anarchy and outlawry, ot which neither she nor
were able to see tlie termination, and at this moment aim
would have been in that state, as New Mexico actually is, if
she had not organized a Government of her own. L- ndei
these circumstances, it does not lie in the mouth of Congress,
the wrong doer that drove Califounn to the course she has
taken, to indulge in much censure ugaiust her for w hat she
has done, or her unpreparedness for doing it, or the irregular
ity of her proceedings in doing it, or the inadmissible influen
ces which may have operated upon her in relation to it. Con
gress and tlie country seem fully sensible of this. The con
sequence is, tliat the controversy in regard to California, has
become very much narrowed, reduced down to a question as
to what boundaries shall be given her. Every body in the
South, I suppose, certainly all th ose who are in favor of tho
extension of the Missouri Compromise line to the Pacific,
would be willing to see California at once admitted into tho
Union, on the single condition of her acceptance of the par
allel of 36d. 30. as her Southern Boundary. 1 should bo
greatly rejoiced if such a curtailment of her limits oou.db®
introduced as an amendment in Mr. Clay's BUI. Such an
amendment, if made, would render another necessary, name
ly: an additional provision in the Bill, organizing a lerritory
j in South California, upon the same principles in reference to
the Slavery Question a9 those which the Bdl establishes for
i the organization of*New Mexico aid L tali. Il these two
amendments could be introduced, Mr. Clay s Bill, it
seems to me, would be entirely unexceptionable to all South
ern men—bating some inevitable difference of opinion as to
wYiat would be the best line of lioundary between New Mex
ico and Texas. Certainly Mr. Clay's Bill, with these amend
ments, would be better for tlie South than the extension ot
the Missouri Compromise line ‘ o the Pacific. It would beat
tended, also, with the advantage of relieving trom embairas
mentya vast number of the best Southern men, woo have
always been in the habit of regarding the Missouri Compro
mise as unconstitutional, and who would shrink, on that ac
count, from giving it a positive and voluntary support.
It would stiil more signally relieve another largo
class of Southern men who fell into the unhappy syn
chronism of advocating tne measure ol the annexa
tion of Texas with the Missouri compromise princi
ple in it. and then turning immediately and making
war on that principle, and who having unfortunately
succeeded but too well in battering down its strength
arid popularity both in the North and South. novvAp
sist on making it a sine qua non for the adjust
the portentous controversy that is convulsing the
country. There is an incomparable awkwardness,
a moral paralysis in such a position, which makes it
quite impossible that those who occupy it should bo
very influential in maintaining the sine qua non on
which they have taken their stand.
For my own part. I have to say that the Missouri
compromise principle is art old favorite of mine for the
settlement of territorial strife between the slavehold
ing and non-#laveliolding sections of the Union. I
have had occasion to vote for it twice : once on the
passage, in 1815. of the Texas annexation resolutions
which contained it, and again on the passage in tlie
House of Representatives, in the same year, ol a bill
for organising the Oregon territory —in which hill the
principle was also contained. When Mr. Folk, Mr.
Buchanan, and other leading men recommended it as
the basis of settling the controversy ty which our ter
ritorial acquisitions from Mexico gave rise, I was
anxious tiiat their advice should be taken by the
country. But it failed ol popular acceptance, mainly
through the influence of Southern objeetiomytnd hos
tility. At tills time there is evidently a strong re
turning tide of popularity setting throughout the
ranks of the Democratic party of the South, in lavor
of the Missouri compromise principle. How soon it
is destined to sutler another ebb, no man can tell. I
believe, however, that in tin* actual and probable fu
ture state or me puuiic nunu. trie adoption oftt as an
amendment to Mr. Clay’s hill would produce a better
effect in the South than any other mode of adjustment.
And every body knows that in the settlement of
all quarrels from the least to tlie greatest, the giving
of permanent satisfaction to the parties is the most
important tiling to be done or attempted. For this
reason, notwithstanding in point of abstract merit, 1
would prefer Mr. Clay’s Bill amended as I have just
above suggested to anything else, yet in deference to
the existing strong concentration of Southern public
opinion in favor of the Missouri Compromise princi
ple, I would readily yield up my preference and glad
ly accept of Mr. Clay’s Bill, modified by the intro
duction into it of that principle. But 1 cannot es
pouse the idea of making either the Missouri Com
promise principle or the proposition I have mention
ed as receiving-rny abstract preference a sine <pia nan
in this matter. On the contrary, in case they noth
fail of adoption, I should feel constrained by a sense
of general patriotic duty, corroborated by all the ar
guments and considerations 1 have heretofore adver
ted to as peculiarly affecting Southern Democrats, to
lall back on Mr. Clay’s bill with such modifications
as would be certainly obtainable by proper Southern
eo operation and to accept it with these modifications
as the basis of conciliation and adjustment of the
humiliating and dangerous strife’ which now afflicts
the country in regard to our conquered Territories.
Having now noticed ail the provisions contained in
Mr. Clay’s Bill, and expressed myself in favor of
supporting it as a final alternative, even though that
part which 1 disapprove, — io. wit, the measure of ad
mitting California as a State. —should not be at all
modified so as to make it more acceptable, the ques
tion may perhaps be asked, how is it to be reconciled
with the principles of’ duty fop a man to co-operate in
the passage of a bill, so material a provision of which
he disapproves?
TANARUS which I reply, that there never was a wilder, more mis
taken and untenable idea, than that j} inan must-approve of
all the material provisions of a Bill in order to make it his du
ty to co-operate with its friends and to give it his final sup
port and vote. Such a principle would lie incalculably per
nicious. It would amount to a practical repudiation of a'l
republican Government by rendering Legislation itself an im
practicable thing, under such a Government. The very con
stitution of the United States was ad >pted by means of tbs
votes of members of the Federal Convention who were dissat
isfied with much that it contained, and much tliat it omitted.
It tilled in the State Conventions, by receiving numer
ous vote's from those who voted for it with reluctant and dis
satisfied minds. It was a strong, ail-conquering sense of duty
that constrained them to vote for what they disapproved, in
order that theymight get along, with it, wliat they fell to bo
needful for the salvationof the country. And .-’.all we take up
on ourselves to be so much better than our fathers ? After
they, with manly wisdom and greatiuv s, have formed a Con
stitution and founded a Government, !>y acting on the prin
ciple of concession, conciliation and Compromise, sacrificing
in a multitude of important points, the r strong individual o
pinions and sectional feelings, shall we be so degenerate as to
roll me to acton that principle, even in a case where the very
preservation of their glorious work requires it'at our hands ’
Shall we though standing oa their gigantic shoulders, bo such
miserable pigmies, as to sink altogether below their lofty ex
ample ? With such an example before us, Bhail we be utter
ly callous to its ennobling influences, and deliberately leave
our country to all the awful hazar>is of the impending crisis,
because-, forsooth, before- we can be prevailed on to give ouv
immaculate vote for its salvation wc must have a law propo
sed to as which shall, in all it*, provisions, square, exactly,
with our particular ideas! Shall we be guilty of such a
course, regardless of the tremendous consequence* involved,
and flatter ourselves that our country or the world will mis
take our intense perverseness and narrowness, for Roman
sternness of principle and wise, patriotic devotion to our natal
soil ?
Mr. Ciay'6 Bill is aootnplex measure. It embraces provis
ions for the admission ot one State into the Union, the or
ganization of Governments for two Territories and the set
tlement of a Boundary question of immense importance be
tween one of those Territories and a Sovereign State of the
Confederacy. And, it undertakes to do all these thir.g3 in
such a manner as will effectually and forever settle the Slave
ry Question in its most fearful aspect—that of its connection
with the Territories of the United States. Now it is hardly
probable that such a Bill should, in all its propositions, be so
framed as to suit precisely, even Mr. Clay himself, or any one
member of the Committee of Thirteen that reported it. It
was presented, however, by them as the most feasible and
hopeful plan they could device for the Settlement of a moot
perplexed, exasperated and dangerous quarrel betwesc. the
j North and the South. It would be aburd to require tha* a
