Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

aforesaid, when Mr. Benton moved that they lie on the table. Lost: Yeas, 24; Nays, 28. Mr. Benton next moved that they be so amended as not to connect or mix up the admission of California with any other question. Lost: Yeas, 23; Nays, 28.

Various modifications of the generic idea were severally voted down, generally by large majorities.

On motion of Mr. Foote, of Miss., it was now Ordered, That the resolutions submitted by Mr. Bell or the 28th February, together with the resolutions submitted on the 29th of January, by Mr. Clay, be referred to a select Committee of thirteen; Provided, that the Senate does not deem it necessary, and therefore declines, to express in advance any opinion, or to give any instruction, either general or specific, for the guidance of the said Committee.

April 19.-The Senate proceeded to elect by ballot such Select Committee, which was composed as follows:

Mr. Henry Clay, of Ky., Chairman.

Messrs. Dickinson, of N. Y.

Phelps, of Vt.

Bell, of Tenn.

Cass, of Mich.

Webster, of Mass. Berrien, of Ga.

Cooper, of Pa. Downs, of La. King, of Ala. Mangum, of N. C. Mason, of Va. Bright, of Ind.

May 8.-Mr. Clay, from said Committee, reported at length, the views and recommendations of the report being substantially as follows:

1. The admission of any new State or States formed out of Texas to be postponed until they shall hereafter present themselves to be received into the Union, when it will be the duty of Congress fairly and faithfully to execute the compact with Texas, by admitting such new State or States.

2. The admission forthwith of California into the Union, with the boundaries which she has proposed.

3. The establishment of Territorial Governments, without the Wilmot Proviso, for New-Mexico and Utah, embracing all the territory recently acquired by the United States from Mexico, not contained in the boundaries of California.

4. The combination of these two last mentioned measures in the same bill;

5. The establishment of the western and northern boundaries of Texas, and the exclusion from her jurisdiction of all New-Mexico, with the grant to Texas of a pecuniary equivalent; and the section for that purpose to be incorporated in the bill admitting California and establishing Territorial Governments for Utah and New-Mexico.

6. More effectual enactments of law to secure the prompt delivery of persons bound to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, who escape into another State; and,

7. Abstaining from abolishing Slavery; but, under a heavy penalty, prohibiting the slave-trade in the District of Columbia.

The Senate proceeded to debate from day to day the provisions of the principal bill thus reported, commonly termed "the Omnibus."

June 28.-Mr, Soulé, of Louisiana, moved that all south of 36° 30' be cut off from California, and formed into a Territory entitled South California, and that said Territory

"shall, when ready, able, and willing to become a State, and deserving to be such, be admitted with or without Blavery, as the people thereof shall desire, and make known through their Constitution."

This was rejected: Yeas, 19 (all Southern); Nays, 36.

July 10.-The discussion was interrupted by the death of President Taylor. Millard Fillmore succeeded to the Presidency, and William R. King, of Alabama, was chosen President of the Senate, pro tempore.

July 15.-The bill was reported to the Senate and amended so as to substitute "that Congress

[ocr errors]

shall make no law establishing or prohibiting' Slavery in the new Territories, instead of "in respect to " it. Yeas, 27; Nays, 25.

Mr. Seward moved to add at the end of the 37th section:

But neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude shall be allowed in either of the Territories of New-Mexico or Utah, except on legal conviction for crime.

Which was negatived; Yeas and Nays not taken.

July 17.-The Senate resumed the consideration of the "Omnibus bill."

Mr. Benton moved a change in the proposed boundary between Texas and New-Mexico. Rejected: Yeas, 18; Nays, 36.

Mr. Foote moved that the 34th parallel of north latitude be the northern boundary of Texas throughout. Lost: Yeas, 20; Nays, 34.

July 19.-Mr. King moved that the parallel of 35° 30' be the southern boundary of the State of California. Rejected: Yeas, 20; Nays, 37.

Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, moved 36° 30′. Re jected: Yeas, 23; Nays, 32.

July 23d.-Mr. Turney, of Tenn., moved that the people of California be enabled to form a new State Constitution. Lost: Yeas, 19; Nays, 33.

Mr. Jeff. Davis, of Mississippi, moved to add : And that all laws and usages existing in said Territory, at the date of its acquisition by the United States, which deny or obstruct the right of any citizen of the United States to remove to, and reside in, said Territory, with any species of property legally held in any of the States of this Union, be, and are hereby declared to be, null and void.

This was rejected: Yeas, 22; Nays, 33.
Yeas-For Davis's amendment:
Messrs. Atchison, Mo.

Barnwell, S. C. Bell, Tenn. Berrien, Ga. Butler, S. C. Clemens, Ala, Davis, Miss. Dawson, Ga.

Downs, La.

Houston, Texas.
Hunter, Va.

Nays-Against Davis's Messrs. Badger, N. C.

up.

Baldwin, Conn. Benton, Mo.

King, Ala.

[ocr errors]

Mangum, N. C.
Mason, 7a.

Morton, Fla.
Pratt, Md.
Rusk, Texas.
Sebastian, Ark.
Soulé, La.
Turney, Tenn.
Underwood, Ky.
Yulee, Fla.-22.

amendment:

Foote, Miss.
Greene, R. L

Hale, N. H.

Bradbury, Me.

Hamlin, Me.

Bright, Ind.

Jones, Iowa.

Miller, N. J.

Norris, N. H.

Cass, Mich. Chase, Ohio. Clarke, R. I. Clay, Ky. Cooper, Pa. Davis, Mass. Dayton, N. J. Dickinson, N. Y.

Dodge, Wisc.

Pearce, Md.

Seward, N. Y. Shields, Ill. Smith, Conn. Spruance, Del Sturgeon, Pa. Upham, Vt. Wales, Del.

Dodge, Iowa.

Walker, Wise.

Felch, Mich.

Whitcomb, Ind.-83.

Aug. 10.-The California bill was now taken Mr. Yulee, of Fla., moved a substitute, remanding California to a territorial condition, and limiting her southern boundary. Rejected: Yeas, 12 (all Southern); Nays, 35.

Mr. Foote moved a like project, cutting off so much of California as lies south of 36 deg. 30 min., and erecting it into the Territory of Colorado. Rejected: Yeas, 13 (ultra Southern); Nays, 29.

Aug. 12.-Still another proposition to limit

Benton, Mo.,
Chase, Ohio,
Davis, Mass.,
Dodge, Wis.,

Ewing, Ohio,
Hamlin, Me.,
Seward, N. Y.,
Upham, Vt.,
Winthrop, Mass.

California southwardly, by the line of 36 deg. | Messrs. Baldwin, Conn., 30 min., was made by Mr. Turney, and rejected: Yeas, 20 (all Southern); Nays, 30. After de-! feating Southern motions to adjourn, postpone, and lay on the table, the bill was engrossed for | a third reading: Yeas, 83 (all the Senators from Clays "Omnibus " So all the bills originally included in Mr. Free States, with Bell, Benton, Houston, Spru- the same bill-after the Senate had once voted were passed-two of them in ance, Wales and Underwood); Nays, 19 (all to sever them. from Slave States). Mr. Clay still absent, endeavoring to restore his failing health.

Aug. 13.-The California bill passed its third reading: Yeas, 34; Nays, 18 (all Southern).

Aug. 14.-The Senate now took up the bill organizing the Territories of New Mexico and Utah (as it was originally reported, prior to its inclusion in Mr. Clay's "Omnibus").

Mr. Chase, of Ohio, moved to amend the bill by inserting:

Nor shall there be in said Territory either Slavery or involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty.

Which was rejected: Yeas, 20; Nays, 25. The bill was then reported complete, and passed to be engrossed.

THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA STRUGGLE.

Out of the Louisiana Territory, since the admission first of Louisiana and then of Missouri

as Slave States, there had been formed the Territories of Arkansas, Iowa, and Minnesota; the first without, and the two others with, Congressional inhibition of Slavery. Arkansas, in due course, became a Slave, Iowa and Minnesota Free States. The destiny of one tier of States, fronting upon, and westward of, the Mississippi, was thus settled. What should be the fate of the next tier?

The region lying immediately westward of Missouri, with much Territory north, as well as a more clearly defined district south of it, was long since dedicated to the uses of the Aborigines Aug. 15.-Said bill had its third reading,-not merely those who had originally inhabited and was finally passed: Yeas, 27; Nays, 10.

[The Senate proceeded to take up, consider, mature, and pass the Fugitive Slave bill, and the bill excluding the Slave-Trade from the District of Columbia; but the history of these is but remotely connected with our theme]. We return to the House.

Aug. 28.-The California bill was taken up, read twice, and committed.

The Texas bill coming up, Mr. Inge, of Ala. objected to it, and a vote was taken on its rejection: Yeas, 34; Nays, 168; so it was not rejected. Mr. Boyd, of Ky., moved to amend it so as to create and define thereby the Territories of New-Mexico and Utah, to be slaveholding or not as their people shall determine when they shall come to form State governments. [In other words, to append the bill organizing the Territory of New Mexico to the Texas bill.]

Sept. 7.-The California bill now came up. Mr. Boyd moved his amendment already moved to the Texas bill. Mr. Vinton, of Ohio, declared it out of order. The Speaker again ruled it in order. Mr. Vinton appealed, and the House overruled the Speaker: Yeas (to sustain), 87; Nays, 115.

Mr. Jacob Thompson, of Miss., moved to cut off from California all below 36o 30'. Rejected: Yeas, 76; Nays, 131.

The bill was now ordered to a third reading: Yeas, 151; Nays, 57, and then passed: Yeas, 150; Nays, 56 (all Southern).

it, but the tribes from time to time removed from the States eastward of the Mississippi. Very little, if any, of it was legally open to settlement by Whites; and, with the exception of the few and small military and trading posts thinly scattered over its surface, it is probable that scarcely two hundred white families were located in the spacious wilderness bounded by Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota on the east, the British possessions on the north, the crest of the Rocky Mountains on the west, and the settled portion of New-Mexico and the line of 36o 30' on the south, at the time when Mr. Douglas first, at the session of 1852-3, submitted a bill organizing the Territory of Nebraska, by which title the region above bounded had come to be vaguely indicated.

This region was indisputably included within the scope of the exclusion of Slavery from all Federal Territory north of 36° 30', to which the South had assented by the terms of the Missouri compact, in order thereby to secure the admission of Missouri as a Slave State. Nor was it once intimated, during the long, earnest, and searching debate in the Senate on the Compromise Measures of 1850, that the adoption of those measures, whether together or separately, would involve or imply a repeal of the Missouri Restriction. We have seen on a former page how Mr. Clay's original suggestion of a Compromise, which was substantially that ultimately adopted, was received by the Southern Senators The Senate bill organizing the Territory of who spoke on its introduction, with hardly a Utah (without restriction as to Slavery) was qualification, as a virtual surrender of all that then taken up, and rushed through the same the South had ever claimed with respect to the day Yeas, 97; Nays, 85. [The Nays were new Territories. And, from the beginning to mainly Northern Free Soil men; but some the close of the long and able discussion which Southern men, for a different reason, voted followed, neither friend nor foe of the Comprowith them]. mises, nor of any of them, hinted that one Sept. 9.-The House having returned the effect of their adoption would be the lifting of Texas Boundary bill, with an amendment (Linn the Missouri restriction from the Territory now Boyd's), including the bill organizing the Ter-covered by it. When the Compromises of 1850 ritory of New Mexico therein, the Senate were accepted in 1852 by the National Convenproceeded to consider and agree to the same: tions of the two great parties, as a settlement Yeas, 31; Nays, 10, namely: of the distracting controversy therein contem

plated, no hint was added that the Nebraska I am willing now that the question shall be taken, re ion was opened thereby to Slavery. whether we will proceed to the consideration of the bill or not.

Several petitions for the organization of a Territory westward of Missouri and Iowa were presented at the session of 1851-2, but no decisive action taken thereon, until the next ses

sion, when,

Dec. 13th.-Mr. W. P. Hall, of Mo., pursuant to notice, submitted to the House a bill to organize the Territory of Platte, which was read twice, and sent to the Committee on Territories.

From that Committee,

Feb. 2d, 1853.-Mr. W. A. Richardson, of Ill., reported a bill to organize the Territory of Nebraska, which was read twice and committed.

Feb. 9th.-The bill was ordered to be taken out of Committee, on motion of W. P. Hall.

Feb. 10th.-The bill was reported from the Committee of the Whole to the House, with a recommendation that it do not pass.

Mr. Richardson moved the previous question, which prevailed.

Mr. Letcher, of Va., moved that the bill do lie on the table. Lost: Yeas, 49 (mainly Southern); Nays, 107.

The bill was then engrossed, read a third time, and passed. Yeas, 98; Nays, 43, (as before.)

Feb. 11th.-The bill reached the Senate and was referred to the Committee on Territories.

Feb. 17th.-Mr. Donglas reported it without amendment.

March 2d.— Last day but one of the session), Mr. Douglas moved that the bill be taken up: Lost: Yeas, 20; (all Northern but Atchison and Geyer, of Mo.;) Nays, 25; (21 Southern, 4 Northern.)

March 3rd-Mr. Douglas again moved that the bill be taken up.

Mr. Borland, of Ark., moved that it do lie on the table. Carried: Yeas, 23; (all Southern but 4;) Nays, 17; (all Northern but Atchison and Geyer.) So the bill was put to sleep for the session.

On the motion to take up--Mr. Rusk of Texas objecting-Mr. Atchison said:

The meaning is here diplomatically veiled, yet is perfectly plain. Gen. Atchison had been could procure a relaxation of the Missouri Reaverse to organizing this Territory until he striction as to Slavery; but, seeing no present and assent to an organization under a bill silent hope of this, he was willing to waive the point, with respect to Slavery, and of course leaving the Missouri Restriction unimpaired.

Gen. Pierce was inaugurated President on the 4th March, 1853.

The XXXIIId Congress assembled at Washington, Dec. 5th, 1853, with a large Adminis tration majority in either House. Linn Boyd of Ky., was chosen Speaker of the House. The President's Annual Message contained the following allusion to the subject of Slavery:

It is no part of my purpose to give prominence to any subject which may properly be regarded as set at rest by the deliberate judgment of the people. But, while the present is bright with promise, and the future full of demand and inducements for the exercise of active intelligence, the past can never be without useful lessons of admonition and instruction. If its dangers serve not as beacons, they will evidently fail to fulfill the object of a wise design. When the grave shall have closed over all, who are now endeavoring to meet the obligations of duty, the year 1850 will be recurred to as a period filled with anxious apprehension. A successful war had just terminated. Peace brought with it a vast augmentation of territory. Disturbing questions arose, bearing upon the domestic institutions of one portion of the confederacy, and involving the constitutional rights of the States. which then existed in relation to details, and specific proBut, notwithstanding differences of opinion and sentiment visions, the acquiescence of distinguished citizens, whose devotion to the Union can never be doubted, has given renewed vigor to our institutions, and restored a sense of repose and security to the public mind throughout the confederacy. That this repose is to suffer no shock during my official term, if I have power to avert it, those who placed me here may be assured.

Dec. 15.-Mr. A. C. Dodge of Iowa submitted to the Senate a bill (No. 22) "To organize the Territory of Nebraska," which was read twice, and referred to the Committee on Territories.

Jan. 4-Mr. Douglas, from said Committee, reported said bill with amendments, which were printed. He said in his Report:

The principal amendments which your committee deem it their duty to commend to the favorable action of the Senate, in a special report, are those in which the principles established by the Compromise Measures of 1550, so far as they are applicable to territorial organiza. tions, are proposed to be affirmed, and carried into practical operation within the limits of the new Territory.

[ocr errors]

I must ask the indulgence of the Senate to say one word in relation to this matter. Perhaps there is not a State in the Union more deeply interested in this question than the State of Missouri. If not the largest, I will say the best, portion of that Territory, perhaps the only portion of it that in half a century will become a State, lies immediately west of the State of Missouri. It is only a question of time, whether we will organize the Territory at this session of Congress, or whether we will do it at the next session; and, for my own part, I acknowledge now that. as the Senator from Illinois well knows, when I came to this city, at the beginning of the last session, I was perhaps as much opposed to the pro-and perpetuate, in their territorial bill, the principles and position, as the Senator from Texas now is. The Senator from Iowa knows it; and it was for reasons which I will not now mention or suggest. But, sir, I have from reflection and investigation in my own mind, and from the opinions of others-my constituents, whose opinions I am bound to respect-come to the conclusion that now is the time for the organization of this Territory. It is the most propitious time. The treaties with the various Indian tribes, the titles to whose possessions must be extinguished, can better be made now than at any future time; for, as the question is agitated, and as it is understood, white men, speculators, will interpose, and interfere, and the longer it is postponed the more we will have to fear from them, and the more difficult it will be to extinguish the Indian title in that country, and the harder the terms to be imposed. Therefore, Mr. President, for this reason, without going into detail,

With a view of conforming their action to what they regard as the settled policy of the Government, sanctioned by the approving voice of the American People, your Committee have deemed it their duty to incorporate spirit of those measures. If any other consideration were necessary to render the propriety of this course imperative upon the Committee, they may be found in the fact that the Nebraska country occupies the same relative position to the Slavery question, as did New Mexico and Utah, when those Territories were organized, It was a disputed point, whether Slavery was pro hibited by law in the country acquired from Mexico. On the one hand, it was contended, as a legal proposition, that Slavery having been prohibited by the enact ments of Mexico, according to the laws of nations, we received the country with all its local laws and domestic institutions attached to the soil, so far as they did not conflict with the Constitution of the United States; and that a law either protecting or prohibiting Slavery, was not repugnant to that instrument, as was evidenced by the fact that one-half of the States of the Union tolerat

while the other half prohibited, the institution of Slavery. On the other hand, it was insisted that, by virtue of the Constitution of the United States, every citizen had a right to remove to any Territory of the Union, and carry his property with him under the protection of law, whether that property consisted of persons or things. The difficulties arising from this diversity of opinion were greatly aggravated by the fact that there were many persons on both sides of the legal controversy, who were unwilling to abide the decision of the courts on the legal matters in dispute; thus, among those who claimed that the Mexican laws were still in force, and, consequently, that Slavery was already prohibited in those Territories by valid enactments, there were many who insisted upon Congress making the matter certain, by enacting another prohibition. In like manner, some of those who argued that Mexican law had ceased to have any binding force, and that the Constitution tolerated and protected Slave property in those Territories, were unwilling to trust the decision of the courts upon the point, and insisted that Congress should, by direct enactment, remove all legal obstacles to the introduction of Slaves into those Territories.

[ocr errors]

Your Committee deem it fortunate for the peace of the country, and the security of the Union, that the controversy then resulted in the adoption of the Compromise Measures, which the two great political parties, with singular unanimity, have affirmed as a cardinal article of their faith, and proclaimed to the world as a final settlement of the controversy and an end of the agitation. A due respect, therefore, for the avowed opinions of Senators, as well as a proper sense of patriotic duty, enjoins upon your Committee the propriety and necessity of a strict adherence to the principles, and even a literal adoption of the enactments of that adjust ment, in all their territorial bills, so far as the same are not locally inapplicable. These enactments embrace, among other things, less material to the matters under consideration, the following provisions:

When admitted as a State, the said Territory, or any portion of the same, shall be received into the Union, with or without Slavery, as their constitution may prescribe at the time of their admission;

That the legislative power and authority of said Territory shall be vested in the Governor and a Legislative Assembly.

That the Legislative power of said Territory shall extend to all rightful subjects of legislation, consistent with the Constitution of the United States, and the provisions of this act; but no law shall be passed interfering with the primary disposal of the soil; no tax shall be imposed upon the property of the United States; nor shall the lands or other property of non-residents be taxed higher than the lands or other property of residents.

Jan. 24.-The bill thus reported was considered in Committee of the Whole and postponed to Monday next, when it was made the order of the day.

The bill was further considered Jan. 31st, Feb. 3d, Feb. 5th, and Feb. 6th, when an amendment reported by Mr. Douglas, declaring the Missouri Restriction on Slavery "inoperative and void," being under consideration, Mr. Chase, of Ohio, moved to strike out the assertion that - said Restriction

"was superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures."

This motion was defeated by Yeas, 13; Nays, 30.

Feb. 15.-The bill having been discussed daily until now, Mr. Douglas moved to strike out of his amendment the words above quoted (which the Senate had refused to strike out on Mr. Chase's motion,) and insert instead the following:

[blocks in formation]

[NOTE.-Prior to this move of Mr. Douglas, Mr. Dixon, (Whig) of Kentucky, had moved to insert a clause directly and plainly repealing the Missouri Restriction. Mr. Dixon thought if that was the object, (and he was in favor of it,) it should be approached in a direct and manly way. He was assailed for this in The Union newspaper next morning; but his suggestion was substantially adopted by Douglas, after a brief hesitation. Mr. Dixon's proposition, having been made in Committee, does not appear in the journal of the Senate, or it would here be given in terms.]

The bill was further discussed daily until March 2nd, when the vote was taken on Mr. Chase's amendment, to add to Sec. 14 the following words:

Under which the people of the Territory, through their appropriate representatives, may, if they see fit, prohibit the existence of Slavery thereinwhich was rejected: Yeas, 10; Nays, 36, as follows:

Yeas For Mr. Chase's amendment:

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Badger, of N. C., moved to add to the aforesaid section:

Which being inconsistent with the principle of Non-Intervention by Congress with Slavery in the States and Provided, That nothing herein contained shall b Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850, (com-construed to revive or put in force any law or regu monly called the Compromise Measures,) is hereby declared lation which may have existed prior to the act of 6th inoperative and void; it being the true intent and mean- of March, 1820, either protecting, establishing, proing of this act not to legislate Slavery into any Territory or hibiting, or abolishing Slavery. State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States

Carried: Yeas, 35; Nays, 6.

Mr. Clayton now moved to strike out so much of said Douglas amendment as permits emigrants

from Europe, who shall have declared their in- | teen at the first, it will be fortunate if, among the ills and tention to become citizens, to vote. Carried: accidents which surround us, we shall maintain that numYeas, 23; Nays, 21-as follows:

Yeas For Clayton's amendment :

[blocks in formation]

ber to the end,

We are on the eve of the consummation of a great national transaction-a transaction which will close a cycle in the history of our country-and it is impossible not to desire to pause a moment and survey the scene around us, and the prospect before us. However obscure we may individually be, our connection with this great transaction will perpetuate our names for the praise or for the censure of future ages, and perhaps in regions far remote. If, then, we had no other motive for our actions than but that of the honest desire for a just fame, we could not be indifferent to that scene and that prospect. But individual interests and ambition sink into insignificance in view of the interests of our country and of mankind. These interests awaken, at least in me, an intense solicitude.

It was said by some in the beginning, and it has been said by others later in this debate, that it was doubtful whether it would be the cause of Slavery or the cause of Freedom that would gain advantages from the passage of this bill. I do not find it necessary to be censorious, nor even unjust to others, in order that my own course may be approved. I am sure that the honorable Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] did not mean that the Slave States should gain an advantage over the Free States; for he disclaimed it when he introduced the bill. I believe in all candor, that the honorable Senator from Georgia, [Mr. Toombs,] who comes out at the close of the battle as one of the chiefest leaders of the victorious party, is sincere in declaring his own opinion that the Slave States will gain no unjust advantage over the Free States, because he disclaims it as a triumph in their behalf. Notwithstanding all this, however, what has occurred here and in the country, during this contest, has compelled a conviction that Slavery will gain something, and Freedom will endure a severe, though I hope not an irretrievable, loss. The slaveholding States are passive, quiet, and content, and satisfied with the prospective boon; and the Free

Mr. Chase moved to amend, by providing for the appointment of three Commissioners residing in the Territory to organize the Territory, divide it into election districts, notify an election on the first Monday in September then ensuing, etc., at which election the people should choose their own Governor, as well as a Territorial Legis-States are excited and alarmed with fearful forebodings lature-the Governor to serve for two years, and the Legislature to meet not later than May, 1855. This extension of the principle of "Squatter Sovereignty" was defeated-Yeas, 10; Nays, 30. Mr. Douglas's amendment was then agreed to, and the bill reported from the Committee of the Whole to the Senate.

The question on the engrossment of the bill was now reached, and it was carried: Yeas, 29; Nays, 12.

and apprehensions. The impatience for the speedy passage of the bill, manifested by its friends, betrays a knowledge that this is the condition of public sentiment in the Free States. They thought in the beginning that it was necessary to guard the measure by inserting the foreign inhabitants of the Territories from the right of Clayton amendment, which would exclude unnaturalized suffrage. And now they seem willing, with almost perfect unanimity, to relinquish that safeguard, rather than to delay the adoption of the principal measure for at most a year, perhaps for only a week or a day. Suppose that the Senate should adhere to that condition, which so lately was thought so wise and so important-what then? The March 3.-The rule assigning Fridays for the bill could only go back to the House of Representatives, which must either yield or insist! In the one case or in consideration of private bills having been sus- the other, a decision in favor of the bill would be secured; pended, on motion of Mr. Badger, the Senate for even if the House should disagree, the Senate would proceeded to put the Nebraska-Kansas bill on have time to recede. But the majority will hazard noits final passage, when a long and earnest de-thing, even on a prospect so certain as this. They will recede at once, without a moment's further struggle, from bate ensued. At a late hour of the night Mr. the condition, and thus secure the passage of this bill now, Seward, of New York, addressed the Senate, in to-night. Why such haste? Even if the question were to go to the country before a final decision here, what would opposition to the bill, as follows: there be wrong in that? There is no man living who will say that the country anticipated, or that he anticipated, the agitation of this measure in Congress, when this Con gress was elected, or even when it assembled in December last.

MR. PRESIDENT: I rise with no purpose of further resisting or even delaying the passage of this bill. Let its advocates have only a little patience, and they will soon reach the object for which they have struggled so earnestly and so long. The sun has set for the last time upon the guaranteed and certain liberties of all the unsettled and unorganized portions of the American continent that lie within the jurisdiction of the United States. To-morrow's sun will rise in dim eclipse over them. How long that obscuration shall last, is known only to the Power that directs and controls all human events. For myself, I know only this that now no human power will prevent its coming on, and that its passing off will be hastened and secured by others than those now here, and perhaps by only those belonging to future generations.

Sir, it would be almost factious to offer further resistance to this measure here. Indeed, successful resistance was never expected to be made in this Hall. The Senatefloor is an old battle-ground, on which have been fought many contests, and always, at least since 1820, with fortune adverse to the cause of equal and universal freedom. We were only a few here who engaged in that cause in the beginning of this contest. All that we could hope to do -all that we did hope to do-was to organize and prepare the issue for the House of Representatives, to which the country would look for its decision as authoritative, and to awaken the country that it might be ready for the appeal which would be made, whatever the decision of Congress might be. We are no stronger now. Only four

Under such circumstances, and in the midst of agita.. tion, and excitement, and debates, it is only fair to say, that certainly the country has not decided in favor of the bill. The refusal, then, to let the question go to the country, is a conclusive proof that the Slave States, as represented here, expect from the passage of this bill what the Free States insist that they will lose by it-an advantage, a material advantage, and not a mere abstraction. There are men in the Slave States, as in the Free States, who insist always too pertinaciously upon mere abstractions. But that is not the policy of the Slave States to-day. They are in earnest in seeking for, and securing, an object, and an important one. I believe they are going to have it. I do not know how long the advantage gained will last, nor how great or comprehensive it will be. Every Senator who agrees with me in opinion must feel as I do that under such circumstances he can forego nothing that can be done decently, with due respect to difference of opinion, and consistently with the constitutional and settled rules of legislation, to place the true merits of the question before the country. Questions sometimes occur which seem to have two right sides. Such were the questions that divided the English nation between Pitt and Fox-such the contest between the assailant and the defender of Quebec. The judgment of the world was suspended by its sympa

« PreviousContinue »