CHAPTER XXXIX

THE COMPROMISE OF 1850

The hot discussion of slavery and of the related questions was an evil omen for both the great parties. Drawing their membership from both North and South, the leaders naturally objected to any issue, no matter what, which tended to weaken party solidarity. Their aim had been, so far as possible, to keep the discussion at least out of Congress. Never entirely successful, they failed utterly during and after the War with Mexico. The Wilmot Proviso pointed toward a new party alignment, northern and western, against southern, and the coming of the political conventions in 1848 was looked upon with grave concern.

THE ELECTION OF 1848

The Democrats met at Baltimore, late in May. The first business of importance was the settlement of the contest between two opposing delegations from New York, representing the factions named, in the choicest of political terminology, Hunkers and Barn-burners, respectively. The Barn-burners were reformers, followers of Van Buren, and firm believers in the Wilmot Proviso. Although Polk had made an effort to remain neutral, he seems to have incurred the special dislike of this group. The Hunkers were probably more nearly like what the politicians of a few years ago would have called "stand-patters." They opposed the Wilmot Proviso, and were inclined to boast of their regularity. Ordinarily a local disturbance would have been of little moment, but in 1848 the division of the party in New York gave the presidency to the Whig candidate. The Democrats nominated Lewis Cass of Michigan, in some respects one of the ablest men in the party. As a western man, he did not feel the keen hostility to slavery which characterized some of his eastern colleagues, nor was he so outspoken in defending the institution as were his friends from the South. His attitude was one of indifference to slavery like that which had prevailed generally throughout the Union in 1790. His solution of the problem was popular

sovereignty, so called, in accordance with which the settlers in any territory would themselves decide for or against slavery.

The Democratic platform denied the authority of Congress to interfere with the domestic institutions of the states, and declared that the federal government ought not to meddle with the question at all. With reference to the War with Mexico the platform followed Polk in stating that it was a "just and necessary" war, begun by Mexico.

The Whigs came together at Philadelphia in June. Among their presidential possibilities they had Henry Clay. Still a hero to his constituents, as he had been ever since his first entry into public life, and still in some respects the best known politician in the country, he labored under the disadvantage of his three defeats. After Clay, came the two victorious generals of the Mexican War, who were, fortunately for the party, both Whigs. To be sure the Whigs had execrated the war from beginning to end, but that did not keep them from taking from it whatever political capital came their way. In fact, with either of the generals as their leader, they could depend upon votes from those who agreed with the Whigs that the war was bad, and from those who had favored it, because of the popularity of the candidate. Of the two, Taylor had more of the vote-getting assets which politicians mean when they talk about "availability." His victory at Buena Vista had been great enough to move the purely political opponents of the war into something as close to admiration as they were capable of feeling, even if it did not touch a patriotic chord in the author of the Biglow Papers. Although Taylor was southern and a slave owner, and a man with no definite views on public questions, totally devoid of any knowledge of the trade of the politician, his party picked him because his name on the ballot might bring success-and the patronage. As his running-mate Millard Fillmore of New York was nominated. As usual the Whigs put out no platform, because as a party they were agreed on one thing, and on nothing else: the desire for the presidency. This issue was somewhat too elementary to serve even as subject matter for a party platform.

Another convention, which adopted the name of Free Soil, nominated the disgruntled Barn-burner, Van Buren. Their platform contained the principle subsequently adopted by the Republicans: nonextension of slavery in the territories.

THE WHIG INHERITANCE

419

In the election, Taylor's popular vote was 1,360,099 to 1,220,544 for Cass. Van Buren's 291,263 was insignificant in itself, but over forty per cent of it came from the Barn-burners in New York. With the Democratic party in that state almost evenly divided, its electoral vote went to the Whigs. The vote of New York was enough to elect Taylor, so for the second, and last, time in their history the Whigs were given an opportunity to administer the federal govern

ment.

THE WHIG INHERITANCE

If it had not been for the appeal of the patronage, the Whigs might well have regretted their success in the election. Never since Jefferson's time had the future held out more prospects of trouble. Then the chief danger had come from abroad; now it came from the United States, in the form of the controversy over slavery, bad enough in itself, and recently made worse because of its connection with the policy of expansion. On previous occasions the acquisition of new territory by the national government had necessitated the adoption of a rule or formula covering slavery. In 1787 the Ordinance for the Northwest Territory prohibited slavery, leaving the Southwest free to do as it pleased. When the question arose in the Louisiana Purchase, the Missouri Compromise prohibited slavery north of the 36° 30' line, except in Missouri, and it left the region to the south free to do as it would. Texas came in as a slave state, while Oregon was organized as free. But there had been no formula adopted covering New Mexico and California. The Wilmot Proviso had been advocated for that purpose, but it could not be put through.

There were various suggestions concerning the proper way of ending the controversy over the subject. In addition to the Wilmot Proviso, there was the proposal to extend the Missouri Compromise line through to the Pacific. That would have given the South a smaller share than the North, as the same principle had done in the Louisiana Purchase, but many southern leaders were ready to accept it. Polk himself favored this proposal, and in doing so he had the unanimous support of his Cabinet, which he rarely got on any other question.

Others suggested that Congress should provide for the creation of territorial governments for California and New Mexico, but should prohibit their legislatures from enacting any laws regarding slavery. If questions concerning it should arise, they were to be left to the

territorial courts for decision, with the right of appeal to the federal

courts.

Still others proposed to leave the question entirely to the decision of the inhabitants in the territories concerned, a doctrine called "squatter sovereignty." This plan appealed strongly to the West, because it seemed to the people there to embody American tradition and custom. Calhoun refused to consider this way out of the difficulty, because to his mind Congress had power to legislate for the territories, and the people in the territories had no constitutional right to pass laws against slavery.

Seeing nothing but the evils of slavery, utterly unable to appreciate either the point of view or the constitutional rights of the South, and determined to force the acceptance of their own principles upon the country, the antislavery forces were in no mood for any compromise. In fact, they drove ahead with various abolitionist plans, the agitation of which at that particular time could do nothing but embarrass those who were working for peace and the preservation of the Union. Among these additional projects was that of a formal decision regarding the status of slavery in the District of Columbia. The antislavery leaders were determined at least to prevent the buying and selling of slaves in the capital, if not to bring about complete abolition for the District.

Not to be outdone by their northern associates in raising subjects of discord, southern Congressmen began to insist upon a more effective law for the rendition of fugitive slaves. The statute for this purpose, passed in 1793, had become more and more a grievance to the North, and more difficult to enforce. It would have been the part of wisdom to have left the question, along with that of the slave trade in the District of Columbia to a more auspicious time, but many leaders on both sides were far too deeply stirred to think of wisdom. In Congress and in the state legislatures angry denunciations had become almost the custom, and appeals for secession were far too ominous. Northern abolitionists and southern "fire-eaters" had one conviction in common: the Union must go.

The antislavery advocates were insisting upon the establishment of legal equality for blacks and whites alike, regardless of custom, economics, attainment, or the Constitution. Their duty, as they saw it, was to reform their neighbor, to impose upon him, regardless of his preference, a social order of their own making. More con

THE WHIG INHERITANCE

421

cretely, they insisted that the South should accept their views as to the proper social relationship of blacks and whites. The Southerners generally rested their case upon the Constitution, which recognized the legality of slave property, and appealed to it for protection. When the rapidly-growing abolitionist sentiment seemed likely to overthrow that bulwark, they proposed to protect their customs and their own rights by forming a new union and a new constitution of their own. Accepting slavery as the foundation of the established order, they saw in it something positively good, not a crime. If they were roused to extremes of bitterness-as they certainly were-it is not surprising, for human nature generally rebels at being "reformed” by outsiders.

Such in brief was the situation which Taylor had to face. The whole problem of slavery was uppermost in men's minds, at a time when they were so angry that a peaceful, satisfactory outcome seemed impossible. Nor was there time for delay. The discovery of gold in California had made imperative the need of government there, and no matter what sort of constitution was drawn, one side or the other in the slavery dispute was likely to be still further enraged.

In January, 1848, at Sutter's Mill, in the lower Sacramento Valley, the builder of the mill saw shining particles in the mill-race. On examination, they proved to be gold. The news spread rapidly, and everybody in California began to hunt for gold. Even soldiers and sailors in the United States army and navy deserted, hoping to make their fortunes. From all over the country there was a grand rush to California, and the rapidly-growing population was of the sort to be expected, under such circumstances: adventurers and desperados of all kinds, together with ordinary, respectable human beings. In order to prevent anarchy the law-abiding settlers assumed control, and meted out quick justice to evildoers.

Almost immediately after inauguration, President Taylor had sent agents to New Mexico and California, for the purpose of urging the people there to draw up constitutions and apply for admission into the Union. California had already started proceedings before the President's representative arrived, and in September, 1849, a state convention met, and drew up a constitution, prohibiting slavery. This was duly adopted, and all that remained was for Congress to approve, and to take the state in.

When Congress met in December, there was a prolonged contest