Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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