do not; but however this may be, the case of our friend Brigham would ery aloud for relief, and the honorable chairman is not the statesman he has been cracked up to be unless he woule be willing to grant it! But, Mr. President, we will suppose Utah admitted, Brigham elected Senator, and actually present in this city with all his retinue, and that he forms a procession, with himself at the head, of the aforesaid retinue for the Capitol. Being somewhat fatigued, he all at once makes a dash with his twice twenty wives for an omnibus, in one corner of which is sitting my worthy friend the chairman. What would become of the Senator? Would he not be stifled? But suppose he escapes, and the omnibus draws up in front of the Capitol; the honorable Senator, who is so much distinguished for his urbanity, could do no less than hand the "domestic institutions" out, and conduct them into the Capitol. Who, then, shall rise and move that this chamber be opened to "the ladies?" It cannot be my honorable friend from Texas, (Mr. HousTON,) who ordinarily performs that grateful office, for he is utterly opposed to this bill; but at the instance of some Senator who is in favor of the "principle" avowed in this amendment, the doors are thrown open, and in rushes Brig-| ham and his forty wives, who arrange themselves around the chamber. The Hon. Brigham! on being sworn in, immediately takes the floor on "the negro question." And O! how the eyes of "the darlings" would flash, and their countenances beam with joy, as their leige lord towered away on the superlative advantages of negro servitude over good old fashioned Saxon liberty, and "the inalienable rights of man!" By the time, Mr. President, all this is over, we should begin to understand the modus operandi of this monstrous system-of this unheard of proposition-to leave the people of the Territories to regulate their "domestic institutions" just as they please. Polygamy! and Slavery! fit associates-united in the bonds of unholy wedlock, and producing a miscreated progeny, called in the first instance principles," but which has finally dwindled down to "the principle of non-intervention with the domestic institutions" of the Territories, the people whereof are to be left "perfectly free to form and regulate them in their own way." Let the honorable Senator stand up here and say that he is for a system which will convert the interior of this continent into a Sodam, and which will conflagrate it with brimstone, unless a righteous God, who rules the destinies of men, shall order it otherwise. But, sir, I contend that the bill itself will be nothing but jargon-nothing but a bundle of contradictions and inconsistances if this amendment prevails. There will be all sorts of discordant voices and notes therein. One clause cries out the people, represented by the council and house of representatives, may be overruled by the governor, and another that the council, house of representatives, governor and all, may be overruled by Congress, and then comes the amendment which asserts, almost impudently, that we leave the people of these Territories "to regulate their domestic institutions" as they may think best. How ean inconsistency go further; and how can legislative hypocracy exhibit a more brazen front. And what is more, not one-half of the work of upturning ancient foundations will have been done. You must immediately attack the restriction of slavery introduced by an immense majoriiy, and by many Southern votes, into the Oregon bill, and you must demolish the ordinance of 1787, in its application to so much of Minnesota as is situated east of the Mississippi In short, the whole structure of legislation which has been erected with so much of toil, and which has engaged so much of the abilities of the greatest and best man of the nation, is to be swept to the ground, and all that is malignant in fanaticism both North and South, and all that is wild, unreasonable, and pestiferous in sectional strife is to be let loose upon our national counsels and upon the country. It results, Mr. President, from these considerations, that the basis of the adjustment of 1850 was not to leave the people of the Territories free to regulate their domestic institutions as they pleased, but it was the "statu quo ante bellum." We were to leave the country exactly in the condition we found it-some part of it tolerating slavery, and some part of it excluding it. The object was to effect some arrangement that would restore harmony to our national councils and peace to the country, and therefore it was concluded that we should not insert the Wilmot Proviso in the Territorial bil's of that year, but pass them silent on the subject of slavery, with the distinct understanding that we were to drop the subject entirely. That this was the great predominating idea of the adjustment, I can prove from the record. It is well known that all the countries acquired from Mexico were subject to an anti-slavery restriction, as the laws of that republic remained in force notwithstanding the conquest, until set aside by competent authority. The supreme government of that country had long before the war abrogated the so-called institution of slavery, and converted all the territories within its jurisdiction into "free-soil." This important fact is distinctly referred to and recognised by Mr. CLAY in his speech of February 5th. "By law" (he says) "slavery does not exist within the territories ceded to us by the Republic of Mexico." "I can only refer to the fact of the passage of a law by the supreme government of Mexico abol ishing it, I think, in the year 1824." "The laws of Mexico, as they existed at the mo moment of the cession of the territories to this country, remained their laws still, unless they were altered by the new sovereign power which this people and their territories came under in consequence of the treaty of cession to the Uni ted States." Certain Southern Senators were not satisfied with the mere exclusion of "the Wilmot Proviso" from the Territorial bills-they demanded an abrogation of this Mexican law, but the Senate refused to concede such abroga tion. On the 23d of July, Mr. DAVIS, of Mississippi, honorable Senator voted in the negative; that, (the present Secretary of War,) submitted an on the same day, Mr. KING, (late Vice President amendment to that effect, but it was rejected, of the United States,) submitted another propoyeas 22, nay 33. My honorable friend from Illi-sition to divide on the parallel of 36 deg., which nois (Mr. DOUGLAS) seems not to have been present, was rejected by a vote of yeas 20, nays 37—the and did not vote. This proves conclusively that honorable Sentor voted in the negative. It also the basis of the adjustment, or if you will have it appears, that on the 6th of August, Mr. TURNEY so, "the principle" was "the statu quo." There submitted a proposition to divide on the parallel was an existing obstacle to the introduction of of 36 deg. 30 min., which was also rejected by a slavery into the Territories, and Congress was ask-vote of yeas 24, nays 32, and the honorable Sened to remove it out of the way-but the response ator again voted in the negative. The Senator, was no! no! we leave matters to stand as we find in his opening speech, says that the defeat of them we wish to drop the subject. If Con- 1848 "created the necessity of making a new gress refused to remove an impediment which ex- compromise of 1850." How so? Was not the isted to the introduction of slavery into the Terri- whole subject under our control? Was it not tories with which they were at the moment deal- just as easy to establish that line in 1850 as it ing, how can it be said that they intended to was in 1848. In his speech at Chicago, the strike down a similar impediment appertaining Senator assigns reasons enough why that line to other and different Territories which were not should not have been adopted; he insisted strenbefore us at all, nor in the thoughts of any one.uously on that occasion, that the only effect of If, Mr. President, considerations such as these do the division of California on the parallel of 36 not satisfy honorable Senators that the basis of deg. 30 min. would be to create two free States the adjustment of 1850 was in truth and in part in place of one on the Pacific; and this indisuch as I now contend for, it is idle to pursue cated the main ground of my opposition to that the argument further parallel. I have ever thought it very bad policy I have thus, Mr. President, called to the notice for the Atlantic States, and particularly the gloof the Senate the essential elements of the caserious old Thirteen, to bring on this Government which I desire to present, and it only remains for me to advert briefly to certain topics which honorable members, who favor this measure, attribute considerable importance; but which, in my judgment, are entitled to no consideration whatever. Having performed this task, I shall hasten to a conclusion as soon as may be. In the first place, I wish to notice what was said by the honorable chairman (MR. DOUGLAS) on his attempt, in 1848, to carry the parallel of $60 30" through to the Pacific ocean, in which, it seems, he failed. Herein he seems to suppose he can find an ample justification for the attempt which he is now making to break up the Compromise of 1820. Now, Mr. President, what are the facts! There was pending before Congress a bill to organize the Territory of Oregon, the whole of which was situated north of 36 deg. 30 min., the southern line being in the parallel of 42 deg. north latitude, or, in other words, 5 deg. 80 min. north of the Missouri line. The bill, if I mistake not, originated in the House, and, when under consideration in the Senate, it is true the honorable Senator submitted a proposition for an extension of that parallel through to the Pacific ocean as a division between free territory and slave territory, which amendment was adopted by the Senate. In the House, however, it was regarded as incongruous to the main object of the bill, and was rejected accordingly. I cannot see how the Senator can, from this occurrence, derive any apology-much less a justification of his course. If a division on the line of 36 deg. 30 min. was a proper basis of adjustment in 1848, it was equally so in 1850; and why did not the Senator support that basis then, as he had an ample opportunity to do? It appears from the record, that Mr. DAVIS, of Mississippi, submitted in this body, July 19, a proposition to divide on the parallel of 35 deg., which was rejected by a vote of yeas 23, nays 32-the an avalanche of States to be carved out of our Mexican acquisitions. The resort of the Senator to such an argument as this is sufficient proof that he himself is conscious that he has very slender ground to stand on to vindicate the policy of this measure. But by far the most extraordinary part of the honorable Senator's speech consists in his attempt to place himself in an anti-slavery position. He went into a long induction of facts, in order to prove that the restriction of slavery has ever been, and ever will be, unfavorable to freedom. He remarked that the Territory of Iowa was organized without any prohibitory clause, and yet (says he) it became, and now remains, a free State. But the honorable Senator seems to have forgotten that the 8th section of the Missouri act remained in full vigor, and was binding on the people of Iowa during their Territorial existence. It was not necessary that the 8th section should have been re-enacted or reaffirmed in the act creating that Territory. Repetition would not have given it one partícle of additional force, so that the people of Iowa enjoyed the benefits and blessings of exclusion while a Territory, and, in consequence, they enjoy the fruits of that policy to this day. I very much regret that the honorable Senator should have made such strenuous efforts to discredit the ordinance of 1787, which, according to his account of the matter, tended powerfully to the introduction of slavery. He represents the people of the Northwest as engaged in incessant insurrections against its authority; that they regarded it as an act of grinding op pression, and would have slaves, and did have them, in spite of it. What foundation is there for such a pretence as this? There were a few French settlers who held slaves de facto; will the honorable Senator take the responsibility as a lawyer of saying that these persons were ern feeling. He will find out that the honorable chairman does not carry the whole North in his breeches pocket. slaves de jure? Would not the habeas corpus have delivered every one of them from servitude? He does not say whether there were any I maintain, Mr. President, that the people of acts contravening the ordinance; and if so, I hould like his opinion on their validity. Sir, the South, and their Representatives in either the ordinance of 1787 constitutes the main pillar wing of the Capitol, should be the last to seek of that vast and glorious fabric of society which or favor the abrogation of the Missouri Comprois exhibited northwest of the Ohio, and which mise. They should not seek it for the sake of in point of wealth, vigor, intelligence, and uni- their own honor, which they cannot but deversal progress, is without a parellel in this or sire to remain unimpeached and intact. The any other country. Under its benign and ever measure was carried through the two Houses present influence, there has been built up no less mainly by Southern votes, and wholly by Souththan five large and prosperous States, which ern influence. Mr. CLAY, in his speech already will be an ever-present illustration of the ad-more than once referred to, says: "My friend vantage which free communities have over those that tolerate African bondage. I can hardly think, therefore, that the honorable Senator has maintained his anti-slavery position; and the avidity with which Senators from slaveholding States come forward to sustain his proposed immolation of the Missouri restriction, is pretty conclusive proof that they think there is very little in this branch of his argument. from Alabama in the Senate, (Mr. KING,) Mr. Pinkney, from Maryland, and a majority of the Southern Senators in this body, voted in favor of the line 36 deg. 30 min.; and a majority of the Southern members in the other House, at the head of whom was Mr. LOWNDES himself, voted also for that line. I have no doubt that I did also, but as I was Speaker of the House, and as the journal does not show which way the And here, Mr. President, I must take some Speaker votes, except in the cases of a tie, I am notice of the very novel ground taken by the not able to tell with certainty how I actually did Senator from Kentucky, (Mr. DIXON,) that al- vote, but I have no earthly doubt that I voted though as a representative of one of the slave in common with my other Southern friends for States, he might not have submitted this proposi- the adoption of the line 36 deg. 30 min." Here, tion, yet inasmuch as it is brought before the then, was a measure adopted under the auspices Senate, and offered by the North, he may proper- of such men as KING, PINKNEY, LOWNDES, and ly accede to the offer and vote for the abrogation. CLAY, for the adjustment of a great and fearful You have enI want my friend to consider, that if he places controversy between sections. his vote on this ground, he may find himself in-joyed the full benefit of it. volved in very considerable difficulty. You secured the admission of Missouri at the time, and Arkansas I think, with great deference and respect, that since. The admission of Texas was arranged on the Senator ought to have some other evidence the same basis; and now, when the time has of the desire of the North than the mere opinion come for a realization of the just expectations of of any one Senator, however respectable he may the North, you propose to break the bargain. be. I would ask the Senator if he is quite sure How can this be done without an impeachment that a majority of the Committee on Territories of your honor? and how can the North, on this is in favor of this measure? Two of the mem- hypothesis, repose the slightest confidence in bers have already declared their opposition; and you hereafter? Will not compromises and adI strongly suspect it will appear, before we get Justments in future be impossible? and will not through, that there is a third member equally sectional strife infest our public councils and opposed, and then the bill will be a mere strag-pervade the whole country? I verliy believe gler in this Chamber, and ought to be dismissed that this measure is contrary to the true inter for that reason. And I will ask another ques-ests of the South. What you want is peace, tion: Suppose it turns out that a large majority Often and often have you said let us alonefrom the North, even of the Senate, is opposed to this proposition, and a much larger majority of the House, where will the Senator be then? Suppose Northern members shall be induced to betray their constituents in sufficient numbers to pass the bill through the House, and suppose the moment the people get hold of them they are hurled with ignominy into private life, I ask again where will the Senator be? After all, is this a statesmanlike argument, and worthy of the successor of HENRY CLAY? Is a measure like this, subverting one of the most solemn acts of this Government, which has lain at the foundation of the peace of the country for over onethird of a century, to be put through on the ipse dixit of a single Senator from the North? I am pretty well convinced that my friend will find out that the honorable chairman of the Committee on Territories is not exactly the proper exponent of Northern sentiment and North You have com leave our institutions undisturbed. Your true I also insist that this measure is contrary to the true interests of this Administration. With a President elected by an overwhelming majority, and with majorities in the two houses nearly as decisive, the last thing you should have done was to throw this bomb-shell into Congress. Why not devote yourselves to the dispatch of the public business? Why not turn your attention to the Pacific Railroad, to a reduction or modification of the tariff, to harbor and river improvement, to an amelioration of your army and navy laws, and to the vast multitude of sub jects, some of a public and some of a private concern, which now solicit our attention! And what progress, Mr. President, have we made with the public business, and what are we likely to make? What an extraordinary spectacle has been exhibited in the House of Representatives! Weeks spent in perfecting a deficiency bill, which is then crushed down and buried so deep as to be beyond the possibility of resurrection. Be it remembered, that whatever of beneficial legislation the country is to have during any presidential term, must be accomplished at the first ses-life, and I hope soon to find repose in seclusion and sion of the first Congress of that term; the second Bession is too brief for action on anything else than the appropriation bills; and the second Congress is uniformly occupied, though very improperly, with the presidential election, and by preparation for the inauguration of a new Chief Magistrate and the arrangement of his Cabinet. In order to make it certain that we are to do nothing for the country, you have involved us in this negro controversy. The Senate is to be occupied with it many weeks, and, I venture to assert, that the House will be so oceupied most if not all the session. If I were the worst enemy which FRANKLIN PIERCE has on earth, (and I should be sorry to be regarded his enemy at all,) I would do the very thing which has been done by the honorable chairman of the Committee on Territories, by introducing a proposition here wholly uncalled for, and fraught with nothing but mischief. It is with infinite concern that I witness the course Which my whig friends, honorable Senators from the South, deem it proper to pursue on this subject. They seem, almost to a man, disposed to rush forward to the support of the honorable Senator from Illinois. Two of them, one the successor of HENRY CLAY, (Mr. DIXON,) and the other, par excellance, his friend, (Mr. JONES,) have already given in their adhesion to this measure. Now, I say to those honorable Senators, in a spirit of kindness and respect, that I regard the proposed annulment of the Missouri restriction as a measure of radicalism-extreme radicalism. And do the honorable Senators suppose that the Whig party, as a great national party, can be kept on foot on any such basis? r, the very moment you pass this measure you explode not only the Missouri Compromise, but the adjustment of 1850, and the Baltimore Whig Platform of 1852. You blow the Whig party into ten thousand atoms. Another Whig National Convention will be impossible. Nothing can induce me to become, on the contingency named, a party to such convention. It will be idle to attempt any understanding with Southern Whigs on the subject of slavery. Did we not go at Baltimore the finality of the Compromise of 1850 Did we not agree to stand by even the Fugitive Slave law, so distasteful to many of our people? Did we not, on occasion of a proposition by the honorable Senafor from Massachusetts, (Mr. SUMNER,) to repeal that act, abide our promise and vote in the negative? Do you not now tell us in effect that all such covenants are binding on us in perpetuo, but not binding on you any longer than you choose to be bound? I repeat, this measure, if But, Mr. President, if all compromises and platforms are to be blown up by the passage of this bill, and if in consequence I am drawn into a position not unlike that of the soldier at the battle of New Orleans, who, when inquired of by General Jackson, to what regiment he belonged, replied he was there fighting on his own hook, I intend to have a platform of my own, and I am happy to inform the Senate that I have found one which suits me exactly, and I wish to produce it here by way of notice to my constitu ents and the country. On the 11th day of June, 1846, a Democratie State Convention was held at Concord, N. H., whereat a Committee on Resolutions was appointed, of which the eminent citizen, now Presi dent of the United States, was chairman, who reported to the Convention a series of resolutions, from which I take the following: of the Democratic party and Democratic statesmen of the North, entertained from 1776 to the present day, in relation to slavery-that we deplore its existence and regard it as a great deem ourselves more wise than Washington, Franklin, and moral and social evil, but with this conviction we do not their associates, and that patriotism, common honesty, and "Resolred, That we reaffirm the sentiments and opinions compact made by those wise men." religious principle, alike bind us to a sacred observance of the exists"-true! true! It is only the citizens of such States and Territories that can effectually Resolved, That the policy to be pursued in reference to slavery, rests with the States and Territories within which it influence or settle the policy which should be exists that whatever parties may profess, it is only as citizens pursued on this perplexing subject—exactly true! of such States and Territories, that the members of those parAngry external agitation by exciting the pre ties can essentially influence that policy, and that angry ex ternal agitation, by exciting the prejudices of the slaveholding communities, while it may endanger the Union, lends rather to fasten than to destroy the bonds of the enslaved." · judices of the slave-holding communities, while it may endanger the Union, tends rather to sus tain than destroy the bonds of the enslaved"true! every word true! I agree, Mr. President, to every word of these resolutions. It is true, I was very much puzzled Mr. President, I have ever been opposed to in the first instance to determine how the origin this external agitation, and am so still. I admit of the Democratic party of the North could be we have no constitutional or legal right to incarried back to so remote a period as 1776, butterfere with slavery in the States, and I think it when I came to read out of the Declaration of inexpedient to interfere with it in the Territories Independence that "all men are endowed with where it exists. And I admit, further, we have 'certain inalienable rights-that among these no moral right to harass and worry the people are life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness," it of such States and Territories by fruitless exter became very plain. I was equally puzzled by the nal agitation-I condemn it utterly; but then reference to Washington and Franklin, particu- you must permit me to say, with the Chief Malarly to the latter, but on searching out the gistrate of the country, that we regard it as a public documents I was enabled to solve the great moral, social, and political evil, and theremystery. It appears that a memorial by Benjamin fore it is not a proper subject of extension. I Franklin, as president of the Pennsylvania do not like very much to speak of slavery as a society for promoting the abolition of slavery, "moral evil," because it seems to give offence to was presented in the Senate at the first session our friends, who suppose we mean to set up of the first Congress, held under the Constitu- pharisaical pretensions to superior morality over tion, to wit: on the 12th of Frebruary, 1790, the South. It is not so. I admit, there are from which I make the following extract: "that great moral evils at the North, some of which mankind are all formed by the same Almighty we are trying to reform, such as drunkeness, being, alike objects of his care and equally de- and you may chastise us to your heart's content signed for the enjoyment of happiness-the on account of such evils. I must at least be christian religion teaches us to believe and the permitted to think of slavery as a great social political creed of Americans fully coincides with and political evil. I will never unite with you the position." "They," the memorialists, "have in considering it the summum bonum-as a thing observed, with particular satisfaction, that fit to be extended. And here I adopt the many important and salutary powers are vested words of HENRY CLAY, to be found in his speech in you," that is to say in Congress, "for promot- of the 5th of February. I make them my own: ing the welfare and securing the blessings of "I have said I never could vote for it myself, liberty to the people of the United States, and and I repeat I never can and never will vote, as they concieve that these blesings ought right- and no earthly power will make me vote to spread fully to be administered without distinction of slavery over territory where it does not exist." color to all description of people, so they indulge Surely the President must take the same view themselves in the pleasing expectation that noth- of the subject. Surely he cannot be willing to ing which can be done for the relief of the un-extend over the land what he has pronounced happy objects of their care will be either omitted or delayed." I admit, Mr. President, that we are bound to a sacred observance of the compact which unites us as a nation-we should not on the one hand seek to overthrow slavery by violating its provisions, nor on the other pervert its true intent and meaning by making it an instrument for the extension of this " great, moral, and social evil" all over this continent. Would "Washington, Franklin, and their associates," including of course Jefferson, (who once exclaimed, "I tremble for my country when I recollect God is just") have gone for any such extension? Having thus cleared the subject of all doubt, I am prepared to give in my adhesion to every word contained in these resolutions. They reflect high honor on our worthy Chief Magistrate. I embrace them with all my heart. I am willing to live and die by them in short, to make them religiously my rule of conduct now and at all times. Let us see what they are: "Slavery rests with the States in which it exists"-true! "Slavery rests with the Territories in which it "a great moral and social evil"-a deplorable evil. Hence the rumors which have reached us that he is pratonizing this measure, and using his influence to promote it, must be a foul slapder!-his friends ought to resent it. Having thus erected my platform, and having found it sound, after an examination plank by plank, I am prepared for retirement, and I will tell you what I shall do when I am far away from those turbulent scenes. I intend to assume an independent position, and support the best man who is before the country, irrespective of party names. I will not be deterred from giving him my support because he is called a Democrat, or even because he is a slaveholder, provided I am well satisfied he will hunt down agitators and demagogues both North and South. Here are two Senators near me, my friend from South Carolina, (Mr. BUTLER,) and my friend from Texas, (Mr. HOUSTON,) either of whom would do well for the country-"we might go further and fare worse." I have no prejudices against my southern brethren; slavery I consider rather the misfor |