Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

an active part to defeat the treaty of annexaUoiu pejjytlaled by, me ontlie.part of the Unitec States. He knows thai it contained no pro. visions that countenanced the abolition of slave ry in any portion of Texas. I Was stronglj - urged during the negotiation to insert a provis iou to extend the Missouri compromise line across Texas to its western boundary, and was . iufortned that it would aid in securing a consti tutional majority in the Senate, in its favor * J peremptorily refused. .He knows that he offered a proposition to abolish it in one half ol fhe whole of Texas, and that by a line, not drawn east and west, but north and south, so as tqhetn hrtthe Sohth on all sides; by surrounding jter with abolition Stales. ^He also knows, that his friend and supporter on the occasion, Mr. Hayward, of North Carolina, weut still further, and offered resolutions to extend the : ordinance' of I7?8, not only over all of Texas, "Vut even all the Territories lying west ol Arkansas and Missouri, and south of 36 30, with however a proviso excepting the portion of-Texas lying south of a lino drawn east and west In the 34th degree of parallel of latitude. The presumption is strong that in offering his resolution, he acted with his friend Col. Benton, 1b whose course he adhered on the Texas question. But, be that as it may, certain it is heTOt mute. He raised no voice of indignation 'against a measure which proposed to exclude slavery forever from that very region, which he charges me with having given away to the Indians,and losing it to the South. As bad as the policy of -Mr. Adams and Gen. Jackson may be in reference to that region, they did not exclude slavery*. The Indians, who occupy it; are slaveholders, and having an interest in .jCooitpon with you. may be regarded as faithful allies on that vital question. The resolutions of bit friend Mr. II ay ward were designed to " "C arlv'.nll rr<? illlH vp( f!oIon#?l Ucpil.o jrvu,v.i , j Benton now raises his voice in loud denunciation against me upon the false charge of giving away the territory' to the Indians, while he 1Spjprt>Ted75t Ifenst by his silence, of excluding you entirely from the territory, and one half Texas to boot, and to extend the principle of the ordinance of '87 over the whole, including Texas and tho territories. So much for his own position, in reference to the subject of the ctaifce. . It now remains to show that it is, like all his other charges, destitute of foundation. He r&Stt hii charge .that I abolished slavery in Texas, on the /act that I was then Secretary of Stajtp, and that 1 selected the resolution, as it passed the House of Representatives, instead ot'tbo amendment originally proposed by him, arihe basis on which to annex Texas. Thus (arrhe has departed !rom his usual rule and stated foots correctly. I shun no responoibility. 1 am wilfing'to take the whole on this occasion; but it is due to the President and the members ""dPfes administration to say?they were unanimou's in favor of the selccUon made. 1 not only elected it, but assigned nnyr reasons for making "ijilh a despatch to our then Minister to Texas, Mr. Donaldson. I assigned them becaute 1 anticipated that there would be an attempt to undo what was done, after the expiration of Mr. T/fler's administration. This I was resolved to prevent, by stating reasons for the selection fhjjU could not be overruled. The attempt, as 1 suspected, was made, and the late President %as7>ioce been arraigned before the public by two friends and associates of Col. Benton, (Blair and Tappan,) because he could not be wr5ed to overrule what his predecessor had 'done. The following is an extract from the despatch : 44 It is not deemed necessary to stale at large the grounds on which his decision rests. (The President.) It will be sufficient to slate, 'Briefly, that the provisions of the resolution, as it camd from the House, are more simple in ^their character, may be more readily, and with less difficulty and expense, carried into effect, and that the great object contemplated by them Is much less exposed to the hazard of ultimate defeat. 'TB'at they are more simple in their character, a.^rjr few remarks will suffice to show.? Recording to the resolution as it came from the House,' nothing more is necessary than that the Congress of Texas should be called together, its consent given to the provisions contained in it* and the adoption of a constitution by the pco. pie in Convention, to be submitted to the Cohgress of the United States for its approval, In the same manner as when one of our own "tdrnfories is admitted as a State. On the contrary, according to the irovisions of the Senate's amendment, the Congress of Texas must, in like manner, be convened, it must then go ttimnn), lt,a atmv nnrl trnilblesome DTOCCSS of carving a State out of a part of its territory ; aftenvards it must appoint agents or com mis. sionera to meet similar agents or commissioners, to,be appointed on our purt, to discuss and agree on the terms and conditions on which the State ball be admitted, and the cession of the re. maining territory to the United States; and after all this, and not before, the people of the aid State must call a convention, frame a constitution, and then present it to the Con. gress of the United States for its approval, but whlcb cannot be anted on, until the terms agreed, upon by the. negotiators, and which constitute the conditions on which the Statu is to bo admitted, shnil have been ratified. -That they may be more readily and with less difficulty and eipense carried into effect, is plain from the iact, that lite details are fewer and less complex. It is obvious that the numerous and complicated provisions contained in the amendment of the Senate, must involve much time and difficulty in their execution while-as to the expense, the appropriation o: $100 ,090 provided for by it, is a clear addiliona cost, over and above that attendant on tnc execution of tho resolution of the House. But the decisive objection to the amendmenl of the Senate is, that it would endanger the ultimate success of the measure. It proposes tc fill by negotiation between the Governments o the united Slates and Texas, the terms anc conditions on which the State shall be admittci into our Union, aud the cession of the remaining territory to the United States. Now, bv what ever name the agents conducting the negotia tion may be known?whether they be cnllei commissioners, ministers, or by any other title ? the compact agreed on by them in behalf o their respective governments, would be a treaty whether so called or designated by some othei name. The very meaning of a treaty is r compact between independent States, (ounde< on negotiation, and if a treaty (as it e.loarlj would be) it must be submitted to the Spnatt lor its approval, and run the hazard of receiving the votes of two thirds of the members present which could hardly be expected, if we are t( uutira frnm rnOBnt PtlipriClli'B. Thia nfilonlf J*"*" -~i ; ?*? 1s considered by the President as a conclusive reason for proposing the resolution ofthe House instead of the amendment of (he Senate, as th< basis of annexation." The above extract will place you in posses ion of the leading reasons /or making th< election: Events prove that the selection wai judicious. Texas was annexed against evei i effort of open enemies and treacherous friend both here and there, and the most strenuoi . efforts to defeat it by England and France, ar r by it your weak and most exposed flank wi protected against danger from without, and tl ? machinations of" abolitionists and Utetr abelto ? at home. It was a great victory, both for yoi cause and the country, and was fell to be so : . the time. That it was due to the selectic i made, I have the highest authority. Mr. Doi r aldson, in his letter to me, after annexation wt achieved, said that any other course but th: ! pursued would have defeated it. Dot Col. Benton now objects that the Hons resolution contained a provision to extend th Missouri Compromise line to the western bout dary of Texas, and asserts that this cxtensio abolished slavery in the State?meaning, I sti| , pose, that it prevented the introduction ofslav< in the portion north of the line, when at th time there were no settlements or slaves, was not, it seems, the resolution or those wh voted for it and passed it, and among thei himself, whose vote could have defeated it, tht abolished slavery, as he calls it, but I, wh made the selection of the House resolution, i preference to his amendment. The slightei agency, it seems, on my part, in reference t any measure, makes me solely responsible f< the whole. It would he better at once for hit to take the ground, that I only am responsibl for all the misdeeds ot the government, since - .1 ??_ ...u,..i - came ltllO puuiic we, win-un-r ?ji cwhiiiiwiuh omission. But what could 1 do ? The Pres dent had to act, and to select one or the otHe resolutions?his or the House. The selectio was left to him1 II that of the House wa tainted by the Missouri Compromise with abr litionism, as he states, his resolution was muc more deeply infected. I have his own word for the assertion. He declared that his amend meat, as adopted by the Senate, was the sam with the string of resolutions he had introduce at the preceding session, and renewed at th then session. lie aUodec'ared that they wer generalized and comprised in one, to avoi objections to details. One of this string ( resolutions, thus covered under general term* was to divide Texas into two equal parts, by line drawn North and South, of which th western part was to be subject to the ordinanc of'87. A measure coming from a quarter s hostile, and accompanied hy such a declarator was justly suspected as intending mischief. I was so considered, generally, by the friends c annexation in the Senate, as was assented t reluctantly, and only because he had a few sup porters, who with himself held the balance, an refused to vote for the resolution of the House without the amendment. Among them, if m memory serves me, was his friend Hay wan who was for covering all Texas and the whol region north of 36 30 with the ordinance of'97 Timeo Danaos cl dona ferentes. I come now to the last of his charges ; llin I abandoned the South, and left him and a fe\ others alone by the side of the ill-fated owner of the Comet, Encomium, Enterprize an Creole. He does not slate by what act I aban doned you, but leaves it to be inferred from hi remarks, that it was by voting in favor of th Ashburton treaty, which contained no stipula (ion in favor of the owners ol those vessels. I is a trick of his to make his charges very vague ly, so as to make it difficult to detect his error and repel his slanderous attacks. I admit tha I voted tor the Ashburton treaty, i did more [ deliversd a speech in its favor, which, in th opinion of its friends, saved it from rejection lis fate was doubtful. The opposition headc bv Col. Benton was violent, and it required tw thirds to confirm the treaty. I arn willing t take whatever share of responsibility he ma think proper to allot to me for voting for it. look with no little satisfaction to my course o the occasion, from the belief that I rendered the great and permanent service to the counlry.For its adoption was the first link, in that scrie of causes, by which war between Great liritai and us was averted. Who is there now s blind, as not to seo, that if the treaty had bee rejected, war could not have been avoided ?The two countries were in truth on the ver eve of a rupture, the way events were movin at tho time, without either being aware of H At the very next session the Oregon questio for the first time assumed a dangerous and nier acing aspect. A bill was introduced imined ately after its opening, which covered the whol of that territory, the object of which was t commence systematically the work of colonizs lion and settlement on our part. I look my set in tho Senate two or three weeks nfter th commencement of the, session, and found th : bill on its passage, without opposition, and a[ parenlly without division of opinion. I saw th danger to the peaco of the two countries, an that the time had come to take a stand to sav it. I determined to do my duty regardless ( consequences to myself. I arose and oppose it, and thereby exposed myself to the oppositiu 1 of the entire west, which was strongly in i favor. My name then, as well as when th Ashhurton treaty was pending in the Senati was before the people for the highest honor i their gift?placed there, not by myself, but I; ; my friends. Did 1 then permit the low motit of aiming at the Presidency, to which he n i tributes my course on the treaty, to sway n from the path of duly I i My stand prevented the bill from becomin i { a law, and that constituted the second link, i [ the series of causes by which we were enable to avert war between the two countries* Co | ; Benton then went for the bill, and was, I bi > ' lieve, for the whole of Oregon* IIad the treai been rejected at the preceding session, the star f; I took and the resistance 1 made to the bi! I would have been all in vain. It would hat > passed, and the country precipitated into wai but as it was, lime was gained, which was a t important. The agitation, however, was ke I up about Oregon, and similar bills were intr > duced the two succeeding sessions, which fuih f by small majorities. In the meantime, neg 1 liation was commenced and the claim to tl j ! whole of Oregon made. The cry was "all < t I none," and so strong was the current in i . favor, that both parties yielded to it in the ear . part of the session. 1 had resigned my seat 1 the Senate, but was re-elected a short time b - ' fore the session commenced, and took my se f several weeks afterwards. I saw and lelt ll , strength of the current, but resolved to broa r it, and save the peace of the country if possibl i It was arrester! and a counter current create 1 | Col. Benton himself yielded to the count r current, and delivered a speech after the. ball ? was won, in which he belabored those wl r stuck to "all or none" after he found that th< were in a minority, n was uns cnain causes, of which the Ashhurlon treaty was tl i first and indispensable link which avorted wo and by it saved the two countries from one the greatest calamities which could have befu en them, and, I might add. the civilized worl I shall ever remember with proud satisfactio that I took a prominent load and a highly r 5 sponsible part on the side of peace througho s the whole. ry I also admit, that the treaty contained no sitpIs, ulations in favor ot the owners of. the vessels, lis not any to prevent similar outrages in future, id It was an objection, and I admitted it to be so is in my speech in favor of it, not a sufficient one ?e to induce its rejection. But, although the trears ty contained no stipulations to guard against jr like outrages thereafter, much nevertheless, at was done in the negotiation to prevent tbern, ?n and to place the south on much more elevated i- ground in reference to the subject, than where is it stood, when the negotiation commenced, at To understand how much was done towards this, a brief statement of facts, connected with ;e the case of those reports, is necessary. ie They were all coasting vessels having slaves i- on board, and were all either stlanded in their m voyage from the Atlantic ports to ihoie on the a- Gulf on the British possessions, Bermuda and ;s the Bahama I-lands, or forced to put into ports ie by stress of weather tosivo themselves from It shipwreck, or were carried in hy rising of the 10 slaves and taking the vessels into port. Their r? fate was the same. The slaves were liberated, it under circunstances of more or less violence 10 and indignity, by the local authority. The outn rage was enormous, and the insult to the Amerf>t ican flag great. The first occurred as early as 0 the year 1830, and all under the administration >r of General Jackson or .Mr. Van Burcn, except n the Creole. .Application was made to the Exee culive by the owners for redress. After a feebkf1 and tame negotiation of many years, the Brit.' >r ish Government agreed to compensate the own-" i- ers in the case of the Comet and Encomibtn,. ir but refused to make any in that of the Entern prise, on the ground, that the two first occuris red before her act of abolishing slavery had i- ! gone into operation, and the other after it had. h The Administration (Mr. Van Buret)'a) accep Is ted the compensation and acquiesced in the I- refusal, in the case of the Enterprise, without e remonstrance or protest, and thus waived our d right and admitted the absurd and dangerous e principle, on which the refusal was placed, e W hat the Administration shamefully omitted d to do, I resolved to do through the Senate, il >f possible, and with that view, and in order to t, perpetuate our claim of right I moved in the a Senate, in 1840, the three following resolutions, e and succeeded in passing them by a unanimous e vote, with some slight amendment, Col. Benton o voting for them, but not standing by me, as he i, says, lor he never uttered a word in their supIt port: >f "Resolved, That a ship or vessel on the high o seas, in time of peace, engaged in a lawful voy? age, is, according to the laws of nations, under d the exclusive jurisdiction of the State which >, her flag belongs; as much so as if constituting y apart of its own domain. I, " Resolved, That if such ship or vessel should e be forced by stress of weather, or other unavoidable cause, into the port ol a friendly power, she would, under the same laws, lose none of it thejrights appertaining to heron the high seas; v but on the contrary, she and her cargo and s persons on board, with their properly, and all d the right belonging to their personal relations, as established by the laws of the State to which s they belong, would be placed under the protece tion which the laws of nations extend to the un fortunate under such circumstances. i "Resolved, That the Brig Knterprizc, which was forced unavoidably by stress of weather s into Port Hamilton, Bermuda Island, while t on a lawful voyage on the high seas, from one i, part of the Union to another, comes within the e principle embraced in the toregoing resolutions; and that the seizure and detention of the tied grocs on board by the local authority of the Iso land, was an act in violation of the laws of na0 tions, and highly unjust to our own citizens to V whom they belong." 1 Such was the condition in which the adminisn (ration of Mr. Van Buren left these outrageous n cases. They never were brought to the notice - of the public, and the principle first contonded s for was surrendered; and that maintained by n Great Britain in the case, of the Entcrprize aco quiesced in; and, of course all claims of compenn sation on the part of the owners rendered hope less. The following adinistralion had nothing y to stand on, but my resolutions and the vote of g Senate in their favor. If then "the ill fitted t. owners" were sacrificed, it was not by inc. n Their case was rendered hopeless by the prei ceding administration, with which Mr. Benton i- was intimately associated, and in which he ace quiesced; for he never raised his voice in their o favor, in the long period of ten years, during all t* which lime his voice might have been potentialit 1 turn now to explain what was done in refer, e ence to this subject by the negotiation, which e ended in the Ashlwrton treaty, and how much ) ihe Soul I), which he Recuses mo as having ae bandoned, has gained by it. For that purpose d I insert an extract from my speech on the treae ty. [>f "Such was the stale of the facts, when the d negotiations commenced in reference to those 11 cases; and it remains now to be shown in what is state it has left them. In tho first place, the ie broad principle of the law of nations, on which e, I placed our right, in my resolutions, have been n clearly stated and conclusively vindicated in the >y very able letter of the Secretary of State, which e has strengthened our cause not a little, as well t from its intrinsic merit, as the quarter from in which it comes. In the next place, wo have an explicit recognition ol'the principles for which ig we contend, in the answer of Lord Ashburton, in who expressly says that, "On the great general id principles, affecting this cusp," (the Creole) I. "they do not differ; and that is followed by "r.n a- engagement that instructions shall be given to ty tho Governors of her Majesty's Colonies, on id tho Southern borders of the United Stales to exII, ecute their own laws with careful attention to .*c the wishes of their government to maintain r; good neighborhood; and there shall be no offiill cious interference with American vesselsdriven pt by accident or violence into their ports. The o. laws and duties of hospitality shall be executed." id This pledge was accepted by our Executive, o- accompanied by the express declaration of tho ie President, through the Secretary of State, that or he places his reliance on those principles of ts public law which had been stated in the note ly of the Secretary of State. in Here wo have a positive acknowledgement o of the principle, which tho administration of at Mr. Van Iiuren had abandoned and a Dlcdce ih that necessary measures would he taken to prest vent similar occurrences in future, and the e. laws and duties of hospitality be executed. Now d. when I add that all this, thus far, has boon faithcr fully executed, I may assort with truth that you lo gain much, far more than I had hoped, conside10 ring the state in which the subject had been ;y left by the preceding administration. So much of for the charge, that I had abandoned you on the ic occasion, and the assertion of Col. Denton that ir, he had stood by "the ill fated owners." of I have now repelled all the chagres, intended II- to shako your confidence in my fidelity to you, d. in reference to tho most vital ot all subjects to n, the South. 1 have shown that they all rest cithe er on statements that are utterly false, or conut elusions that are entirely erroneous or inconclusive. I have also shown, that Colonel Ben ton has involved himself at every step, inTalse statements, contradictions, inconsistency and ah- t surdities. I will not say, that he made his'Chages t knowing them to he false; for that would brand p him as a Imse calumniator and slanderer; but I a will say he ought to known they were. It may t be however, that he was too much blinded by n his passions and prejudice, or lacked the discrim- t ination to perceive they wore. * I have passed over all that was direc'ed a. d gainst me personally, and not intending to im- I peach my fidelity to you and your canse; because t it did not fill within the reasons, which induced i me to notice him at all. I have also passed i over the torrent of abuse, he has poured out a- li gainst me; not only for the same reason but he- p cause I deem it beneath my notice. He doubt 'I less thinks differently, and regards it, as the r finest portion of his speech; for he has used ex- a prcssions, which pretty clearly indicate, that I > .... ?. -in ? s? L:~ ,u.. o ne anticipates, u win raise mm n< me ic?cl ui ?? the great Athenian orator, for indignant denun- t ciation. He mistakes his fate. He will tie for. t tnnate should he escape sinking to the level of Thersites. He seems, not to apprehend, that p the difference is wide between the indignant s eloquence ofpatriotism and truth and scurrilous p defamation/ I also pass over his attack on the p Southern Address; because it has been too gen. o crally read, and is too well understood, hv you. p lor him to do any mischief by assailing it. The a Lwionder is, that ho should venture to make an c i ifjack in open day light. The remote twilight s 'region ofthe past lying between truth and fiction, o i best suits his taste and geinus. v Passing all these by, I am brought to where v he throws offhis disguise, and enters the camp tl of the enemy, and openly proclaiming himseli a an aholitisnist, endorses all their doctrines, and n steps forth ns their champion. In that charac- s ter, he assumes a dictatorial air, and pronounces e that it is absurd to deny the power of Congress tl to legislate as it pleases, on the subject of sla s< very in the territories; that it has exercised the c power from the foundation without being ques. n tioned until I introduced my resolutions; that S slavery is local in its character; that it must be si created by law, and cannot be carried an inch c beyond the limits of the State that enacted it; d that slaves cannot he carried into New Mexico p or California because the Mexican laws aho tt lished slavery there and are still in force, con- \\ eludes that it is a mere abstract question of no a, importance, because the people there, and ea- tc pecially the foreigners, are opposed to it, and it will not permit yon to emigrate into the tcrrito- it ry with your slaves* p 1 do not propose to enter into a formal rcpeti- a tion of assertions so ostentatiously pronounced. It is not necessary. They were ihe same that p were put forth and relied on by those opposed I to you in the discussion on the Oregon territo. si lial bill, during the session preceding the last; tr and which were then fully met and refuted bv p me and others, who took your side of the ques g Mon. What I now propose is a very summary ei and brief notice of those several assertions. I begin with that which asserts that Congress cl has the power to do as it pleases upon the sub- rr ject of slavery in the territories. I deny the li assertion and maintain that Congress has no w such power over slavery there or elsewhere, or tl over any other subject. I deny that Congress is has any absolute power whatever ,* or that it has c any of any description, except such as aro spe- ai cifically delegated, or that are necessary and s< proper to carry them into execution. I main e lain, that all its powers aro delegated and trust c powers, and not positive and absolute, and thai w all of the latter description belongs exclusively a, to the people of the several Slates in their sove. tl reign character. I also hold that Congress is it but their representative and trustee, and that in c carrying into execution its powers, it cannot ol rightfully exercise any inconsistent with the na- g ture and object of the trust, or with the charac- tl ter of the party who created the trust, and for ri whose benefit it was created. 1 finally hold, a that instead ofhaving the absolute power orcr li the territories, of doing as it pleases, that Con. Ii gress is restrained by all these limitations, and n that its power to exclude you from emigrating b with your slaves into them, cannot be maintain- o ed without denying that ours is a government tl of specific powers; that it is a government of f< which States and not individuals arc the con- u stituents, and that Congress holds its powers as g delegated and trust powers. Nor can it he min- li tained, without assuming that ours is a consult, h dated Govcrnmet, and holds its powers abso- tt lutely in its own sovereign right of doing as it s pleases* ii I also deny, the truth of his next assertion, ji that it has exercised the power over the territo- a rtes, as it pleases, without being questioned un- tl til I introduced my resolutions. I maintain on the contrary, that such power never was exer. " cised l?v Congress, until he and his associates, p passed the Oregon territorial bill. That was h the first bill containg the Wilniot Proviso, that a overpassed as has been stated?passed solely a to assert the absolute right of doing as it pleas, p C8. All others, including the ordinances of I 1787 were passed as compromises which waiv- a ed the question of power, as has hecn frequent- c |y shown. Nor is his assertion more correct, a that the power never was questioned, until the d introduction of my resolutions. It was question- i ed from the start, beginning with the ordinance p of 1787. Mr. Madison pronounced that it was ii j adopted without a shadow of right. Since then, i j it has been acquiesced in not as a right, but as t a compromise until the North refused all corn* e promise, and forced the South to stand on its c rights, where it should have stood from the first, r The next assertion, that slavery is local in 1 its character; that it must he enacted by law, t and cannot bo carried an inch beyond the limits i of the State, that enacted it, is equally nnrnain- I tainable. It is clear that in making it, he in* t teuueu to ainnn, uiai in tnose respects, proper- n ty in slaves stands on very different ground i from every other description of property. c I deny the (act and maintain that there is no t distinction between it and other property, in ? that respect. It no more, requires to bo on- s acted by positive enactment for its origin, that ( property in land or anything olsc. The rela- ? lion ol master and slavo was ono oflhe first f and most universal forms in which property ex. isted. It is so ancient that there is no record of its origin. It is probably more ancient than separato and distinct property in lands, and quite as easily defended on abstract principles. So lar froin being created by positive enactment ; I know of no instaece, in which it ever was, or to express it more accurately, in which it had its origin, in acts ol legislatures* It is always older, than the laws which undcrtako to regulate it, and such is the case with slavery, as it exists with us. They were for the most part slaves in Africa, tliny were bought as slaves, brought here us slaves, used as slaves, and held a9 slaves, long before any enactment made thorn slaves. 1 even doubt whether there is a s single Slate in the South, that even enacted i them to he slaves. There are hundreds of nets i that recognize and regulate them as such, hut i none, I apprehend, that undertake to create i them slaves. Master and slave are constantly t regarded as pre existing relatione. i /Nor ig it any mow local in its character, i han other property. The laws ofall'coun- I ries, in reference to every tiling, including < iroperty of every kinJ, are local, and cannot go n inch beyond the, limits of which (he aulliori. i y of the country extends. In case of property l if every description, if it passes beyond the an. i hority oflhe country wheie it is. into another, j vhere the same description of things are regar- j led as property, it continues to lie so there, but t lecomcs subject to be laws and regulations of i he place in reference to such properly. Bui, i f it lie prohibited as property, in the country ^ nto wliich it passes, it ceases to be so, unless it 1 ius been forced in, under circumstances which t ilaced under the protection of international laws. 1 Thus, one and the same principle apply in this < espect to all property ; in tilings animate or in- | nimate, and rational or jrrational. There ran t ie *.o exceptions; as property every where, i ,nd of every kind, is subject to the control of I lie authority of the country. Thus far, I hold, < hat there can be no reasonable doubts. i Nor can there be any, that the same princi- I ilcs applies between the sevpral States in our < ystcm of government. Slaves, or any other t iroperty cai;ried into a State where it is also l iroperty, continues still to be so ; but if un'o s lie, where it is prohibited, it ceases to be pro* | erty. This is admitted too, by all. It is u!so I dmilted by all, tliat the general government ( uniiut overrule the laws ofa State, as to what t hall or shall not be property, within the limits i f its authority. The only question then is, rhat is the power of the general government c rhcre its authority extends beyond the limits of i be authority ofthe States regarded in their sep- I rate and individual character ? or to make it c lore specific ; can it determine what shall or ^ hall not ho property in the territories or where- c ver else its authority extends, beyond that of c ic states sooeratelv? or to make it still more r d, can it establish slavery in the tcrrirories ? 1 an it enact a law providing thai any negro or s iwlatto found in the territories of the United i tates shall he a slave, and he liable to he t iized, and treated as such hy whoever may t house to do so? According to Col. Benton's \ octrine that Congress may legislate as it \ leases, upon the subject of slavery in the terri- t tries, it wou'd have the power, hut I doubt s hether. there is another individual, who would t groe with him. But if it has not the power L > establish slavery in the territories, how can a have the power to abolish it! The one is v >e counterpart of the other, and where is the c rovision of the constitution to be founded which i uthorizes the one and forbids the other ! h The same question ma)' lie propounded as to i ublic and private vessels belonging to the fnited States and their citizens on the high v ?as ; fur the principle, which applies to the 11 frritories, equally applies to them, and to all laces, to which the authority of the general j orernmeni extends, beyond the states regard- t J separately. e It is, indeed, a great misconception of the u tiaractr and object of the general govern- h lent, to suppose that it has the power to estab- d sh or abolish slavery, or any other properly, * here its authority extends beyond the limits of * lit States regarded individually. Its authority ? r but the united and joint authority of the sev. ral States conferred upon i. by a constitution, ^ dopted on mutual agreement, but by the c *parate act of each Slate, in like manner in I very respect, as each adopted its-own separate c (institution, with the single exception, that o*? 11 as adopted without, and the. other on mnrrraTT ^ greement of all the Stales. It is then, in !act, a 10 constitution of each State, as much so as (j s own separate constitution, and is only the 0 (institution of all the States, because it is that j, f each. As the constitution made the general a overoinent, that too is, io like manner, as much ti ie government of each State as its own sejia- " ite government, and only the government of 1 11, because it is the government of each. So a kewise are its laws, and for the same reason. * :s authority, then, is but the united and com ^ on authority of the several Stales, delegated 0 y each to be exorcised for the mutual benefit |, f each and all, and for the greater security of o ie rights uud interests of each and ail. It was ti >r that purpose the States united in a federal P nion, ami adopted a common constitution and * overnment. With the same view, they con- t ?rred upon the government whatever power it ( as of regu ating and protecting what apper. c lined to their exterior relations among them- *] elves and with the rest of the world. Each, 11 brief, agreed with the others, to uuite their v jint authority and power to protect the safety a nd rights and promoto the interest of each by [ heir united power. Such is clearly the character and object of the ^ ;oneral government, and of the authority and t. mwer conferred on it. Its power ana authority, J laving for its object, the more perfect protection r nd promotion of the safely and lights ol each ,nd all, it is bound to protect by their united c mwer the safety, the rights, the property, and r L- rtf ilm r>itiz?!t? of ail. wherever its V 1113 | IIIIT l toi ?/ ?I.W V...-V..W ? , -- uthority extend'*. That was the object for (inferring whatever power and authority it has, ,nd if it fails to fulfil that, it fails to perform the Inly for which it was created. It is enough for t to know, that it is the right, interest, or pro. lertv of a citizen of one of the Stales, to mako t its duty to protect it whenever it comes withn the sphere of its authority; whether in the erritorii's, or on the high seas, or anywhere Isc. Its power and authority wore conferred m it, not tooslahlish or to abolish properly, or ights of any description, but to protect them. I'o establish or abolish belongs to the States, in heir separate soveroign capacity?the capacity n which they created both the general and heir separate State governments. It would be, hen, a total and gross perversion of its power ind authority to use thetn to establish orabolsh slavery or any other property of the citizens >f the United States in the territories. All ho power it has, in that respect, is to recognise is property there, whatever is recognised as uch by the authority of anyone of the States, its own being but the united authority of each md all of the States,) and to adopt such laws or its regulation and protection as the state of , he case may require. Nor is there the slight- i ist danger, that the recognition of the property t >f citizens of each and all the States within the 1 erritories, would turn them into a babel, as Col. Benton contends. All may co-exist without ( mnflict or confusion, by observing the plain and , ( limple rule of duty and justice. There is another error akin to this, that the i Vfcxican law abolishing slavery is still in force I n New Mexico and California, when not a par- 1 icle of its authority or sovereignty remains in ' ?ithnr. Their conquest by us and the treaty hat followed extinguished the whole, and with , t annulled all her laws applicable to them, ex. :ept those relating to such rights of property ind relations between individuals as may be accessary to prevent anarchy ; tfnd even these ire continued only by sufferance and on the mpiied authority of the conquering country and wt the authority of the conquered, and only from he necessity of the case. Her laws abolish, ing slavery are not embraced in the exception ; 1 m<Hf rt 'wflfft, it wrtold 1>e ralceii oot of lf, as he'awent of Congress could nffl be implied to :onfinue a law which it had no right to establish* But still higher ground may be taken* The Tiomuiit the territory became oura, tbp cqjwti. ution passes over and covers the whole witb ill its provisions, which from their nature,ore ipplicahle to territories, carrying with it-lhe oint sovereignty and authority of e itch and If he States of the Union, and steeping away 'very iVJeiican law, incompatible witb lie rights, property, and relations, belonging to tie citizens of the United States, without regard-to ? what state they belong, or whether it he sil/oi* ed in the northern or southern sections of tie Union. The cilizens of all have equal right* I i>f protection in their property relations -anti persons in the common territories of each and ill the slates. i he same power, (bat swept nvay all the law of Mexico, which, nspde the Catholic religion the exclusive religion of the country, and which let in the religion *>f all4?? lominatrons, which swept a way t he laws prohibiting the introduction of property oPaloiMit very description, some absolutely AiMl'cftfRlfr* nider the condition of pajingdo?i?y anfrirtvfkjf hem in duty free until otherwise prfiVrde^.ffy, swept that which abolished ataverjr, and ' property in slares. No distinction can laMmd* >etween it and any other descriptionof property >r thing consistently with the constitution :at*I he equal rights of the several'MatCaspNInr inion and their citizens. , . : ftut we are told by Coh Bentqnrj that-4c |uestion has, become a mere abstraction mportance; that few have gone erritory, except citizens of the. north a#d (of'igners ; and that they are all opposed lo^ut' kVhat insult ! What? taunt us by teitmg us wer ? :annot go into them becatise fonw gfrnrttiR) ithcrs who have been Idf infre'eJV, tlntf we"R^? >ui by the threat of confiscating our property >v himself and his associates, have become uffieit'nily numerous to keep us out witkoufc tjbla' " titer vent ion of Congress to aid I hem ! tfe-knear lint" property i., t.mid" and could betapUmbtigr hreats, and that to keep usout fnra'shiM4>'tiUtu vas one of the ways to exclude us dtrknateiy. iVhat a comment on the equitjr and jilsttee pf he government, that we, who haye t^jjfeejy pent our blood and treasure to cnpquer^jjta be country, should he excluded .frunhfjljgfr >enefits, while it Is left open< for ,-.lh?r nil enjoyment of all that rabble of foret^un vhich he enumerates with sucfc zest, astbe"#^ ient means of our exclusion- Fx there another m-fnnce of such an autrrige to Hfe';fi?tfnd ' in'Wej listory of any other government ibat evef ^ s,p'1 ? .J +.<&. His avowal of the doctrines of. the a.hob'tioaiate, i ill have an effect he litt'e suspected when he aado it. It furnishes ample evidence to sbow.tkit >e used deception in assigning his r.easoqs fjat-ifeliniug to obey the instructions of.his le.uda?ja<]p, t will be remembered, he offered as his .re^spcus* hat their resolutions instructing him werebofomd from mine, and that mine were ictrod^ejljEpr isunion purposes, and that there was nadi^rence iciweca them, cxcoptih-t mine aimed directlxjU iisurion, and ti eirs ultimately at the same thing, le added in effect, that his de'votkxn to the Union vouId not permit him to tftle for resolntioiMiap eeply taited with disunion. That was, at-rthe ominencemeot of his speech. VYe now. have-in [s conclusion conclusive evidence iron .hw?se!4 hat .ill this was a mere fetch, a stratagem ' *' eal his real motive for declining to obey tktn^#<? l!S ICdJ UJ'JU>ef d9 II 1IUW /?!? IW M ou!d not voe for them .under any circumstance*, or how could an abolitionist, as heavowed kiSJPoM" o 4?<r, powiWjr obey resolutions which are utterly t vari nice with their doctrines ? To obey-yv/Oliki ave involved him in palpable contrailiction, so iucIi so that it could uot/^ii.|0|proeU^{p.^m^jp. verwiielin him with shame, i( he is not to shame iivulnerablo. 'i'his he-saw, and that he had no Iternative left, but to resign or,disobey. He deermined in faWof the latter; but. this of i tse If-d ici iot relieve hfmvnf his dilemma. He kriew^ell hat it would defeat nis object to com*? out boldly nd say that he had -abjured his former creed and d opted i hat of the abolhioniita. And hem e heiyaa. arced to adopt some other expedient; and urpose, adopted the miserable pretext q( slaud$rr usly charging me and my r^olutitips, and.hi$^n agislature and their resolution withdispiiion.'aqa f?assigning that as his reason^ for not obeytnV hem, when he knew that his position made it fais ossible for him to obey thorn. Btiv these tire hot he only resolutions adopted by the JtogisTatu'rtiflT is State to mstruct him. The previous. Legate, ure adopted two others, of which hesay? tbetlhe^ ruly express the sense of the State,; Bnd.' heyed them, not only in their letter, but epujjU Plioy are in the following words: "Resolved, That tie peace, permanency'and velf.ire of our National Union depend uponi'stijfet dherence to the letter and spirit of the 6th action ol t':e act of Congress of the United StSMk, mtitled 'an act to authorize the-peOp!et>f thfe^iaouri territory to form a constitution and Sl?|U? rovernment for the. admission of such State ?ML<> ^ he Union on an equal footing with the origjjrjl States, and to prohibit slavery in certain terrifiesapproved MarchBth, 1820." , . jjL-.', 1 " Resolved, That our Senators in the Congreve if the United States are hereby instructed, an8d&r epresentatives requested to vote in accovdahbe * vith the provisions and the spirit of the said 8th r.i - :J ... .it ik? .......... iin.ut. iecrion Ol ?llic nam utif IU an mic ijuqouuaa. wuivii nay come before ihera in relation to the.Qrg$nju. ion of new territories or States, oat of the tairU*)y now belonging to the United States, or which lereafter may be acquired either by purchaefybf reaty or by conquest" , It is proper to observe, that the 8th sectioiftp vhich they refer contains the Missouri compiro* nise, which established 36 30 as the dividing tthe )ctween the slaveholding and non-slaveboMtng ^ States, drawn between the western boundary he State of Missouri and the westcrn,boiM)darj^of Louisiana. These resolutions he says he obey|jd, n letter and spirit, when in fact be flagrantly vioated them, by his vote for the Oregon "terminal till, prohibiting slavery in that territory, -without tny compromise annexed; and that too to astCrt he principle of unlimited power of Congress oser llie territories, and in open detiance of alLcotnpsonise. He calls that bill his proviso, and well he nay, for he passed it when it was in his power to Jefeat it. A very few remarks will suffice to chow hat I have not expressed myself stronger'then truth warrants. * The first resolution asserts " that the peace, h*r~ nony and welfare of our national Union depends upon a strict adherence to the letter and spirit of :he Missouri compromise, and the last instructs " their Senators and Representatives-to rote :ordance irilh i/s provisions and spirit in all ques* ions which may come up before (hem in relation (a 'he organization of new territories or States, out of erritories now belonging to the United Stales, or which hereafter may be acquired." No instruc. :ion could be more full or explicit, or assign stronger motives for obeying them, especially to :me professing so great a devotion to the Union. There is no mistaking the moaning. He is .in. structed to vote for all bills in reference to the territories which may conform to the letter: and.spirit of the Missouri compromise, and against all that do not; that is, to voto for all that extend the "fine westward from its terminus on the western boun. dary of Texas, for that is its letter; and to eeenre to the South that portion of the territory lying on the eouthem side of the line, as effectually as that compromise did in fact, all the territory which Jay "" ?? ??"tluirn cifto ami M vnla utrnirifit all bill* thai did not, for that is meant by it? spirit.t There was good reason, to put in "spirit,'/ far jit was^understood then that the doctrine began to be broached that the laws of Mexico aoolisWig slavery would continue in force unless they were repeiW, if not prevented by eome eflcctnal guard, forad. ditional remarks can make his disobedience mom