gress has decided wrong. It may be that it is a part of the judiciary of the United States, though I do not think so.

SENATOR WEBSTER (in his seat).-Nor I.

SENATOR CALHOUN.-Again: the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts says that the Territories are not a part of the United States-are not of the United States. I had supposed that all the Territories were a part of the United States. They are called so.

SENATOR WEBSTER (in his seat).-Never.

SENATOR CALHOUN.-At all events, they belong to the United States.

SENATOR WEBSTER (still in his seat).—That is another thing. The colonies of England belong to England, but they are not a part of England.

SENATOR CALHOUN.-Whatever belongs to the United States, they have authority over, and England has authority over whatever belongs to her. We can have no authority over anything that does not belong to the United States, I care not in what light it may be placed.

But, sir, as to the other point raised by the Senator-internal improvements. The Senator says there is not a member on this side of the chamber but what has voted to appropriate money out of the public treasury for internal improvements in the Territories. I know that a very large portion of the gentlemen on this side have voted to appropriate money out of the public treasury for improvements in Territories, upon the principle of ownership; that the land in the Territories in which improvements are made has an increased value in proportion to the sums appropriated, and the appropriations have, in every case, been given in alternate sections. But many gentlemen here have even utterly denied our right to make them under that form. But that question comes under another category altogether. It comes under the category whether we have a right to appropriate funds out of the common treasury at all for internal improvements.

Sir, I repeat it, that the proposition that the Constitution. of the United States extends to the Territories is so plain a one, and its opposite-I say it with all respect-is so absurd a one, that the strongest intellect cannot maintain it. And I repeat that the gentlemen acknowledge, by implication, if not more than that, that the extension of the Constitution of the United States to the Territories would be a shield to the South upon the question in controversy between us and them. I hold it to be a most important concession. It narrows the ground of contro

STUDYING POLITICAL ECONOMY

From the collection of the New York Historical Society

versy between us. We then cannot be deprived of our equal participation in those Territories without being deprived of the advantages and rights which the Constitution gives us.

Senator John M. Berrien [Ga.] offered a modification of Senator Walker's amendment to the effect that the Constitution, insofar as its provisions can be applied to the condition of a Territory, should extend to the Territories; this was accepted by the mover, and the amendment so modified was adopted by a vote of 29 to 27.

Senator Webster made a determined effort to have the Walker amendment dropped, and succeeded in doing so only on the last day of the session. The Senate sat until the early morning hours of March 4, 1849, when Webster's motion was passed by a vote of 38 to 7, and the appropriations went through with no proviso about the new territories. President Polk at once signed the bill-perhaps unconstitutionally, for it is a disputed point as to whether his Administration had terminated at midnight, even though this hour had been conventionally advanced by the Senate to the close of their deliberations.

President Taylor, at the opening of the session of Congress (December 3, 1849), gave Robert Toombs [Ga.], a member of the House of Representatives, who approached him on the subject, clearly to understand that he would not veto a bill for the admission of the Territories with the Wilmot proviso.

The Southern Representatives then made a determined effort to elect one of themselves (Howell Cobb of Georgia) Speaker, in order, so far as possible, to prevent the passage of the proviso. Owing to the fact that a majority of the votes cast were required to elect, a deadlock ensued, and the feelings of the Southern Representatives were wrought up to a high pitch. On December 13 Richard K. Meade [Va.] made threats of secession from the Union by the South, which were more strongly repeated by Mr. Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens [Ga.], and William F. Colcock [S. C.].

RULE OR RUIN

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DECEMBER 13, 1849

MR. MEADE.-Sir, let a proposition be made and supported by those who are desirous of crushing this demon of discord, for the purpose of uniting the conservatism on both sides, in opposition to any measure which shall look to the abolition of slavery in the District, or a prohibition of it in the Territories. If such a proposition should be adopted, I should be willing to take a Speaker from either side of the House, relying upon him to carry out the views thus expressed by a majority of this body.

But, sir, if the organization of this House is to be followed by the passage of these bills, if these outrages are to be committed upon my people, I trust in God, sir, that my eyes have rested upon the last speaker of the House of Representatives.

If the North generally, whose big prosperity is the result of unrestricted intercourse with the South, refuse the terms we prescribe, let us talk no more about the blessings of Union.

MR. TOOMBS.-I do not hesitate to avow before this House, and the country, and in the presence of the living God, that if by your legislation you seek to drive us from the Territories of California and New Mexico, purchased by the common blood and treasure of the whole people, and to abolish slavery in this district, thereby attempting to fix a national degradation upon half the States of this confederacy, I am for disunion, and, if my physical courage be equal to the maintenance of my convictions of right and duty, I will devote all I am and all I have on earth to its consummation.

MR. STEPHENS.-I concur in every word uttered by my colleague [Mr. Toombs], and, furthermore, I declare that, from the moment a concerted attack, made by the North upon the rights of the South, is an accomplished fact, the Union is thereby dissolved.

MR. COLCOCK.-As soon as the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia is resolved upon, or the Wilmot proviso is passed, that moment I shall move for the dissolution of the Union.

These threats did not materialize, since Cobb, after all, was elected Speaker. On December 22 the question of the contest was referred to a committee which re

ported that a plurality should decide. This was agreed to by a vote of 113 to 106, and on the next day Cobb was elected by a vote of 102, Robert C. Winthrop [Mass.], a Whig, receiving 99 votes, and David Wilmot [Pa.], the choice of the Free Soilers, 8 votes. Thus, through a division of the North, the South won its point.

On December 31 Joseph M. Root [O.] moved to instruct the Committee on Territories to bring in a bill for the organization of New Mexico with the Wilmot proviso. Of this proposition Thomas L. Clingman [N. C.] remarked on January 22, 1850:

Re

"Attempt to trample on us and we part company. member, sir, that this very territory was acquired by conquest, and that while the South, according to its population, would have been required to furnish only one-third of the troops, it in point of fact did furnish two-thirds of the men that made the conquest. And the North, deficient comparatively as it was in the struggle, now says that its conscience, or its cupidity, will not permit us to have the smallest portion of that territory. Why, sir, this is the most impudent proposition that was ever maintained by any respectable body of men!"