Y 
 
 
HOLUNGER 
 pH 8.5 
 
 MILL RUN F3-1543 
 
CALIFORNIA AND NEW INIEXICO. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 HON. JOSEPH M. ROOT, OF OHIO, 
 
 w 
 
 IN THE FIOUSE OK REPllKSENTATIVES, FEIillUAllY 15, IhJO. 
 
 In Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the Resolution reftnini; the 
 President's Message to the appropriate Standing Committees. 
 
 Mr. ROOT addressed ihe Committee as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: In the remarks which I shall 
 submit to the committee I do not intend to wan- 
 der far from that portion of the President's an- 
 nual message which relates to the Territories re- 
 cently acquired from Mexico. I shall first notice 
 his recommendation respecting California; and I 
 beg leave here to say , that perhaps under other cir- 
 cumstances I should feel disposed to criticise some 
 of the proceedings which led to the formation of 
 a constitution for California and her application to 
 be admitted into the Union as a State. I might 
 think that a better boundary might be prescribed 
 for her on the east. Yet as things now stand I 
 am perfectly willing, ready, and desirous to have 
 her recognized as a State with her boundaries as 
 they are. I go further, and say that 1 wish her 
 eastern boundary were the Nueces instead of the 
 one she has prescribed for herself. Sir, with all 
 that territory, California would not be much larger 
 than Texas — certainly not larger than Texas 
 would be if she could get all she claims; and 
 it would enable us, if she were admitted a State 
 of that size, to make some of those fair com- 
 promises of which we have heard so much of 
 late. We could then carve out of California a 
 free State to go along with any slave State that 
 might be carved out of Texas. But that is out 
 of the question now; and I only repeat what I 
 have said before, that in the present state of 
 things I am glad that California has so much 
 territory within her boundary, and 1 shall go for 
 recognizing her as a State, admitting her into the 
 Union, and ratifying all that she has done in the 
 premises, notwithstanding any irregularities that 
 may have attended those transactions. 
 
 So far I am ready, Mr. Chairman, to second the 
 President's recommendation. But he has gone 
 further, and has given us advice with respect to 
 the residue of the territory acquired from Mexico. 
 He does not tell us what he desires us to do, but 
 tells us he desires us to do nothing; that we should 
 let New Mexico and the rest of that territory alone 
 — have nothing to do with it. Again, with respect 
 to the boundary of Texas, he desires us to let that 
 alone, too. He warns the legislative authority not 
 to interfere with that matter. 
 
 Here, sir, I cannot follow his advice; here I 
 must be permitted to question the wisdom of his 
 recommendations. I am for doing something. I 
 
 believe that Congress has a duty to do, and I am 
 for having it done by Congress. And I would like 
 lo have that done which I believe best, not only 
 for that territory, but best for the whole country; 
 and I believe that, so far as the question of action 
 or non-action is concerned, a large majority, both 
 in this House and in the other branch of Congre^^3, 
 are in favor of it. Certain I am that the let-alone 
 policy — the "masterly inactivity" policy — cannot 
 find many friends among the people. To be sure, 
 there may be very wide differences of opinion 
 among gentlemen. Some may desire that one thing, 
 some another, and some that still another thing 
 should be done; but 1 believe that there is a ma- 
 jority of this House who are in favor of having 
 something done. Most gentlemen seem to think 
 that action, and prompt action, is required at our 
 hands; and I may be p.ermitted, I trust, to express 
 my surprise at the wonderful change that has been 
 going on in the mind, not only of the President, 
 but of a good many of his northern friends, since 
 the close of the last session of Congress. 1 need 
 not tell you how urgent the friends of the Presi- 
 dent were then to have some sort of a government 
 provided for California. I do not, of my own 
 knowledge, say that the President was urgent. I 
 never heard him say a word on the subject; but it 
 was said he was; and a paper in this city, profess- 
 ing to be advised of his opinions, and to speak 
 for him, said he was very anxious indeed that 
 Congress should provide some government for 
 California. Why, his conversations were pub- 
 lished in many newspapers — whether correctly 
 or not I don't know; but it was asserted, and so 
 far as I know not contradicted, that he urged 
 personally upon members of Congress, " For 
 God's feake to provide some government for Cal- 
 ifornia, beside the government of the bowie- 
 knife;" and the only dispute about what his views 
 and wishes were, was as to the kind of govern- 
 ment which he desired. Some gentlemen insisted 
 that he favored the proposition which originated 
 in the Senate, and was stuck on the civd and dip- 
 lomatic appropriation Uill — known as the Walker 
 amendment; others said he was perfectly iiulitfer- 
 ent as to what kind of government it wa;;, so that 
 some government was provided. Well, Congress 
 did not provide any government. You know 
 why, Mr. Chairman, as well as I do — any mem- 
 ber of the last Congress, who was present at the 
 close of the last session, must have understood 
 

 perfectly well why a government was not pro- 
 vided for CHJifornia. It was not the fault of the 
 House. The House, in season, passed a bill pro- 
 viding a territorial government for California; 
 they sent it to the Senate in time for that body to 
 have acted upon it, if they had been disposed to 
 do so; b.t that august body did nothing with it; 
 they laid it away, and it was never heard of again. 
 The ne.\t we heard from them on the subject was 
 a money bill — the civil and diplomatic approfiria- 
 tion bill — with the Walker amendmenl attached to 
 it. I think it was pretty generally believed at the 
 ti le by the friends of the present Administra- 
 tion, and perhaps by others, that t^at amendment 
 was to become a law. I cannot speak authoriia- 
 tivcly, but I know we had a very decided expres- 
 sion of opinion from gentlemen, then and now mem- 
 bers of this House, that it would pass. The men 
 who were to pass it were, it was said, all counted 
 and booked; and if the screws only stuck, we 
 were told it would go through. We had some 
 exceedingly tight screws, and then again a good 
 many loose ones. The latter gave the former a 
 good deal of trouble and vexation of spirit. All 
 who were here at the last session must remem- 
 ber iliat last memorable night — Saturday night 
 and Sunday morning. We remember what efforts 
 were made to pass that Walker amendment, and 
 we remember how it was defeated. It never was 
 relihquished until it became a " fixed fact," that, 
 if insisted U|Jon to the bitter end, the whole civil 
 and di|dcimatic appropriation bill must be lost. 
 Ay, I kiio\v the fiict now, and I knew it tlien, that 
 tliere were a sufficient number of men bound to 
 that purpose; and they would have carried it out 
 if God had spared their lives and strength. Yes, 
 sir — I was one of them. Never, never should the 
 Walker amendment go through the House, if we 
 by any legitimate proceedings could prevent it. 
 We are told that southern gentlemen have that ex- 
 ample in view. 
 
 A VOICE. Yes, and we intend to profit by it. 
 Use it sparingly, gentlemen. We had only 
 thirty-six hours to fight against. I believe if we 
 had hud thiriy-seven some of our men would 
 have given out, and they were precisely those 
 who were fiercest at first. If you begin six 
 months beforehand you will get out of breath, 1 
 think. Don't jump too quick, nor take too long 
 a start. Take it coolly, as we did, and then — 
 good luck to you. 
 
 Let ine inquire again why it is that the Admin- 
 isttation, which was no longer ago than March 
 last so anxious to provide some kind of a govern- 
 ment beside a " bowie-knife government" for 
 California, which then had a |.opulaiion, 1 believe, 
 not exceeding 20,000, should now, when we come 
 to consider of a territory containing a population 
 of at least 100,000, think a " bowie-knife govern- 
 ment" is just the right sort ofgovernment for them? 
 If they wanted a law enacted for California last 
 stsMon, why not have a lav/ enacted for New 
 Mexico now ': If a bowie-knife government would 
 not answer lor California then, with a population 
 of 20,000, \^l y is a bi wtt-knile governiiicni ■;ood 
 enough for New Mexico now, with a population 
 of 1(10,000? "Oh! there is a little alaim among 
 iIh m at out Iiidiiin."; lui thin ihere is a suffi- 
 <i( lit niilitury force to jiroiect them." Is that all 
 the danger ? What aay ihc people, or rather, what 
 »i.yb their tonvcntiofi, of their wnntp, withes, and 
 
 condition? If there was ever a people belonging 
 to the United States that needed law, a clear law, 
 a law that can be easily understood and promptly 
 and impartially executed, it is the population of 
 New Mexico. Why, it is as incongruous a popu- 
 lation as it is possible to find on the continent. A 
 great many of them liavc but a very small dash 
 of while blood, oiliers have a pretty considerable 
 dash of the African. No matter what their blood 
 or race is; no matter how or of what that popula- 
 tion is made up, they are all our fellow-citizens 
 now — made so by the treaty; and it is too late 
 now to regret the possibility that some of them 
 may be sit tin;: along side of us lure before a 
 great while. That you should have thouglit of 
 before, whilst you were carrying on a war for 
 
 the acquisition of territory 
 
 Mr. JOiN ES here interposed and put some ques- 
 tion to Mr. R. 
 
 Mr. ROOT. I cannot allow the gentleman to 
 interrupt me — with all respect. If there is any- 
 ' thing unsound in my argument, the gentleman can 
 ' get the floor and answer it hereafter. 
 I I insist, Mr. Chairman, that we should go for- 
 ward, and provide >ome sort of a government for 
 New Mexico as well as admit California into the 
 Union as a State. I insist that it is our duty; 
 I that it is due to those people; that it is due to the 
 people of the Stales. Why, how long is it since 
 j we had a great clamor raised here about Minnesota! 
 Everything was going to wreck and ruin because 
 I Minnesota had no government— Minnesota with 
 less than ten thousand inhabitants then, and will) 
 1 but little prospect of a very rapid increase, for il 
 : is in the hyperborean region. At this season of 
 the year traveling is done there on snow shoes. It 
 is a good lumber country, a fine country, in many 
 respects, and it will be peopled v hen our norih- 
 ern people have nowhere else to go, and some 
 may prefer perhaps to go there when they could 
 go elsewhere. But there was a great necessity, it 
 was said, for a territorial government there 1 and 
 j my colleague [Mr. Schenck] really incurred a 
 good deal of censure at the time because he insist- 
 ed that we should be careful what kind of a gov- 
 ernment we provided for those people, and that 
 time should be allowed to examine and perfect the 
 bill. The case was so urgent, it was said, that the 
 bill must be passed at once. 
 
 I am unwilling to leave the people of New Mex- 
 ico, Dcseret, &c., without law, or without officers 
 duly autnorized to administer the law. 1 am un- 
 willing to allow Executive discretion as wide scope 
 there as it has had in California; and 1 am still 
 more unwilling to allow the military government 
 1 that seems to be the only one that the United States 
 j has provided for those jieople, to continue longer. 
 I Such things were bad enough in time of war — they 
 ; are intolerable in time of peace. 
 ! Indeed, sir, so obviously [iroper is it that Con- 
 I press should provide a territorial government for 
 ' (hose people, that some of the wisest of the friends 
 ; of the Administration in Congress, have, in the 
 I face of the recommendations of the Executive, 
 expressed a delvTminaiion to b.ing in a lull or. bills 
 for that purpose; and I only regret that they do 
 not propose to have iheir bills contain a prohibition 
 of slavery in all the territory; but the bills might 
 be amended by inserting such a prohibition, if 
 there were even in this House a majoiity in favor 
 of it. I am for doing that. 1 believe it to be not 
 
3 
 
 only the risht l)ut the iliity of Coiigrcsa to insert 
 such a pirtliiliiiioii. 1 lielieve wc liiive the nu- 
 tliority to (Jo ii, mid thul n innjoniy of ilie people 
 of the Uiiiled Slates desire thui it should lie done; 
 that it would be betlcr for the United Suites, l)eltcr 
 for the people of the territory, better in every re 
 spect that it should l)0 done. 1 will not rnter ' 
 into nn argument here iibout the crttot of the law 
 of Mexico, the luw of the country as it existed 
 when we acquired it. Suppose, sir — and I will 
 not dispute tho fact — that the law in und of itself 
 prohibits slavery; we know that a larg;e und re- 
 spectable portion of the fieople and of ihe jieople's 
 Representatives insist that it does not exclude 
 slavery. They claim that the people of the slave- 
 holdiriif Stales have the ri^ht to i;o there wi'h their 
 slaves and hold them as they could at home in their 
 own Stales. While men of wisdom, pairioiiam.and 
 delermination, hold that this is the fact, that this is 
 the clear law of that land, that this is their un- 
 doubted right, and whilst they declare that ihey 
 will exercise that right, arc we to be told that ii is 
 unnecessary and inexpedient to settle this vexed 
 question.'' However clear my own opinion may 
 be, smce a respectable portion of my fellow-citizens 
 enterluin a different opinion, I will go for .settling 
 the dispute, for quieting the controversy, for 
 putting this bone of contention out of the way 
 forever. 
 
 Well, sir, what are the objections to the erv 
 actment of this prohibition against slavery in 
 those territories now free? Why should it not be 
 done? If a mnj"riiy of the people desire it, if a ; 
 majoi ity of their Represcntalivrs and Senators will 
 vote for it, why should it not be done, let me ask. | 
 "Oil, because it is a disuirbing question — because 
 it will disturb the harmony of the country !" I 
 strongly suspect that this argument is ba.sed rather 
 upon the fear that it will disturb the harmony of 
 party — that it i.^ a good deal more on account of 
 its disturbing the harmony of party than the har- 
 mony of the country. Again, it is said that it 
 would be "aggression" upon the slaveholding ^ 
 States^ and we are warned, solemnly warned, and ] 
 exhorted — gentlemen say they don't intend to | 
 menace u.s — but to warn us to cease our aggies- i 
 sions! — the South will never submit to them! I 
 Are not gentlemen mistaken as to the fact of there f 
 ever having been any aggressions upon them? 
 Why, who has been gaining most relatively since 
 the Constitution was adopted ? What kind of re- 
 sults liHve followed these long-continued aggres- , 
 sions on the South by the North ? What was the i 
 state of things at the adoption of the Constitution ? , 
 There were thirteen States. To be sure slavery 
 in some form still existtd in a majority of them; 
 yet there were not to exceed five that did not at 
 that time contemplate an almost immediate abo- ' 
 Ution of slavery within their respective borders. 
 And, sir, there were not to exceed three whose 
 delegates in the convention did not express the , 
 hope that the day was not far distant when it , 
 would cease to exist entirely. I do not sav that 
 they were unanimous in this expr»ssion. There 
 were men from Virginia and from North Carolina , 
 who expressed the wish and the hope that sla- i 
 very should be abolished in those Slates. 
 
 Mr. ASHE interposed, and wished Mr. R. to 
 mciuion ihe name of any man from North Caro- ^ 
 lina who, in the convention, expressed the hope | 
 that slavery would be abolished in North Carolina. 
 
 Mr. ROOT. It WiiHn't the gentleman, nor nny 
 of his onie«tor«. [A lnu<»h.) ! think I am correct 
 in th« Ntutein<rnt I have made; but if there were 
 even four SintcH whose deleguteH did not exjirtm 
 the hope that ulavery would \>f. al>«iliHlied in their 
 Siato, there wan a mujority of unti-iduvcry Siatca. 
 There were all the iVew ICngland SmtCM, New 
 York, New Jersey, and PmimylvBuia— anii-^ln- 
 very Stales. To be sure. New York, New Jer- 
 sey, and Pennsylvania had hIuvcs, but they were 
 nil looking forward to the time when they would 
 get rid of slavery. It was an anti-sluvcry conven* 
 tion; there wu.m u majority of unti-id. ivory Staiea 
 represented in it. And what did the firnt Congrcfit 
 that ns.scmblcd under the Con.^iitution do ? The 
 Rcpresentdiives from all the Stiitos, acting together, 
 provided ftir organizing n territorial government 
 for the only territory we then hod — ihe North- 
 west Territory — for excluding slavery therefrom, 
 and for creating five additional Slates, to l<c formed 
 out of that territory, and every one of them wiw 
 to be a free .State. So that the antislavery Si.\te« 
 at that time outnumbered the slave States; and it 
 must have seemed probable, if not certain, that the 
 disproportion would shortly become still greater. 
 Certainly, the " balance of power" was not 
 deemed essential to the safety or welfare of the 
 slave StiUes then. That is a new idea. At that 
 time they could not and they did not contemplate 
 that there was ever to be an equal number of sl.ive 
 States to free Slates in the Liiiion. But the ac- 
 quisition 6f Louisiana, and Florida, and Texas 
 since— events which could not then hnve been 
 foreseen — gave the slave Stales great advantages 
 over tlr- free States; till now, after *• sixty years 
 of aggression by ihe North upon the South," there 
 are just as many slave St.ites as free States in the 
 Union, and gentlemen lell us that it would be un 
 unheard-of outrage for a free Sta'e to be admitted 
 into the Union without at the same time admitting 
 a slave Stale. 
 
 I may add, that the framers of our Constitution 
 seem never to have C'.ntempl.ited tlie accpiisi- 
 tion of territoi-y froju other nations. If they did, 
 they made no cxpre.-'s provision for ith disposition 
 and management. Doulttless they hud a distinct 
 idea of what kind of authority might be exercised 
 under the war-making and tieaiy-makiiig power. 
 But all the provisions of the Constitution relative 
 to territory seem to refer to the territory which 
 the United States then pos.':e8sed; but it by no 
 means follows that Congress has not authority 
 to make laws for and to govern the territory we 
 have acquired since. Under the treaty-making 
 power we have both acquired and ceded away 
 territory, and yet it is claimed that the law- 
 making power of ihe United Stat.s may not govern 
 such territory. Sir, it always has done it. South- 
 ern Representatives and Senators and Pre."5idcn:s 
 have assisted in doing it, and it is now too late to 
 urge that they havo acted without authority. 
 
 Indeed the power to prohibit slavery in territory 
 belonging to the United Slates has been exercised 
 by Congress again and again, and just as often 
 conceded by southern statesmen; but if it were 
 not so; we might well siiy to those gentlemen who 
 deny the power — show us the power to acquire 
 and to cede away territory, and we will show you 
 ih( power to govern it. 
 
 There is no doubt, then, Mr. Chairman, as to 
 the power, the right, of Congress to legislate over 
 
this subject — to mnke such a prohibition. There 
 are some of the non-action, non-intervention gen- 
 tlemen who eniertnin notions which I will not un- 
 dertake to describe— for 1 never could understand 
 ihem. But I believe that a Inr^e majority of the 
 peopleand of their Representatives agree upon this: 
 that Congress has the exclusive right to legislate for 
 the Territories. There is a difference of opinion as 
 to the extent of that ri^ht, but there is no dillerenre 
 in the minds of a vast majority both of the people 
 and ilieir Representatives, that Congress has the 
 exclusive right; that there is no other authority to 
 legislate over the Territories than that which is ex- 
 ercised by, or derived from, Congress. And how 
 is the power of Congress over this subject limited ? 
 By the rights of the States? And what are the 
 rights of the S'ates as such in the Territories ? Not 
 to carry their Inxrs tlitre and have them enforced, 
 certainly, but to have laws for the Territories 
 made by Congress, in which the States are all rep- 
 resented. One Slate has no more right to control 
 the Territories than another; nor have all the 
 States any riglit to control ihem. It is Congress, 
 and Congress alone, that has any and all authority 
 over them; and it would be impracticable for any 
 authority to be exercised over them except by 
 Congress. A pretty business the thirty ditferent 
 States would make of it if they, were all to legis- 
 late sep;)rately for the Territories according to their 
 various views of expediency and propriety; and a 
 pretty code it would be if all the laws of all the 
 States were put in force there. And yet, if one 
 Stale might make laws for the Territories, all 
 might, and all would be equally binding. 
 
 It sounds queer to hear gentlemen, in the same 
 breath that they tell us Congress has no right to 
 prohibit slavery in the Territories, offer us a com- 
 promise—how? Why, by Congress prohibiting 
 slavery north of a certain line, and saying nothing 
 about it south. Is it constitutional, then, for Con- 
 gress to prohibit slavery north of 36° 30', or of 
 some other line which may be agreed upon by the 
 parties, but unconstitutional to prohibit it south of 
 that line? Whv, after you tell us it is unconsti- 
 tutional for Congress to prohibit it at all in any of 
 the Territories, what kind of a compromise do 
 you offer us when you agree that it shall be pro- 
 hibited in a portion of them r What does an un- 
 constitutional prohibition amount to? What do 
 we get by such a compromise? Why, merely a 
 prohil)ition which is good for nothing. We could 
 not make such bargains — however much in a bar- 
 gaining mood we might be. I dont know what 
 others'may do — I am not a compromising man. I 
 cannot compromise upon a constitutional question 
 — I rannot compromise upon a question of human 
 freedom — and, so help me God, I will not. I tell 
 youl belong to that reviled political sect, the Free 
 Soilera. I go against any slave territory, any 
 more slave States. You shall have no difficulty in 
 making up an issue with me. Perhaps it i.s vaunt- 
 ing loo much to say so; but I trust you will have 
 no difficulty in getting me to a trial — bring this 
 cause to a hearing as soon as you please — God and 
 the country decide between us. I believe that de- 
 lay is the cause of more trouble than anything 
 else. Why, this quesiifui ought to have been set- 
 tled long ago. I tell you. if y(Mi settle it by the 
 legi;<l!iiive power of this (iovei nment against my 
 views of right, I will sulmiit. I believe I may say 
 the same for the mass of the peojile of the North. 
 
 ' But if it is settled against you — if slavery be pro- 
 hibited in these Territories, we are told you will not 
 submit: no, you will never submit. You will not 
 submit to degradation ! You roll up your eyes in 
 astonishment at the mere introduction of such a 
 proposition into this House. Have you really, 
 sir, been taken by surprise? Did you never hear 
 of such a thing before, or diii you think northern 
 men were not in earnest when they told you tiiat 
 they should endeavor to exclude slavery from alt 
 territory to be acquired from Mexico? I confess 
 they have given you but too good reason to think 
 so. 
 
 You, Mr, Chairman, are a southern man, and a 
 friend of the late .\(lministration. You weie a 
 member of the y9th and 30;h Congresses, and an 
 ardent supporter of the Mexican war. Let me 
 ask you, sir, what was that war be^un and prose- 
 cuted for? Was it not for territory ? and was it 
 not obvious from the beginning that it would only 
 result in the acquisition of territory ? and was it 
 not just as obvious that when tiie territory should 
 be acquired, the strife that vve now have must 
 come? Were you not warned, over and over 
 again, that the attempt would be made to exclude 
 slavery from it, and that it would be persisted in 
 to the end? Yes; Ijut you and your friends 
 sneered at the warning. You confidently expected 
 to be able to appropriate the whole or the greater 
 part of it to slavery. Had you iielieved that you 
 would not be able to do that, the war would have 
 ceased; indeed, it never would have been begun. 
 A souttiern President and southern members of 
 Congress will never go to war to conquer free 
 territory. Did not your late candidate for Presi- 
 dent, writing to a friend in time of the war, say 
 that the Wilmot proviso would be death to the 
 war and death to the Democratic party ? Aye, 
 and he never .*aid a truer word. 
 
 Mexico is weak and distracted. Her condition 
 invites aggression. Her mines and her valleys 
 now and ever will hold out almost irresistil>le 
 temptations to our southern brethren to provoke 
 war with her, which must always result in the 
 conquest of her territory; and the sympathy of 
 
 I her people with the African race will always afford 
 means of provoking war. Only one thing can 
 prevent such wars, and that is to convince the 
 southern people that the territory, if conquered, 
 must ever remain free. That will do it, sir. Let 
 the people of the slave States be assured that 
 
 i whatever territory may hereafter be conquered of 
 Mexico will be free, and ihey will keej) the peace 
 
 ! towards that country without bonds. 
 
 Now, it is quite obvious that if the Territories 
 or Slates bordering on Alexico should l>e slave 
 soil, then the adjoining Mexican territory, when 
 acquired, would become slave soil; and that if, on 
 the contrary, our border should be free soil, any 
 future acquisitions of Mexican territory mus! also 
 be free soil. And it is only when we view the 
 question in this light that we can sec all its im- 
 portance. Cy prohibiting slavery in the lerriloiy 
 already acquired from Mexico, we exclude it 
 forever from the territory yet left to Mexi- 
 co, aixl, what would l)e no less desirable, we 
 should prevent future wars of conquest being 
 waged by this couniry against that, and which 
 could not fail to provoke the wrath of a just God 
 Mg;iinHt us. It is for these reasons that I say it 
 is our duty to prohil)it .slavery in the Territories; 
 
and ( wish tliat this House, at least, would always 
 stand firm upon tliis ground. I once thouj^lit 
 it always would — that it would never abandon 
 this position. And permit me to tell you that so 
 long as this House shall stand firm fur free soil, 
 no matter what the Senate may do, no nmltcr what 
 the President docs, the cause of freedom will be 
 .safe. Just let it be understood by the people 
 of the Territories that they can never come into 
 this Union as a State — that the House will stand 
 in their way and keep them out as long as slavery 
 is tolerated in their constitution, and, sir, we 
 shall have no slavery constitutions presented here. 
 That is what put freedom into the California con- 
 stitution. That, if anythins. will put freedom 
 into the New iVlexico constitution, if you only 
 make them understand that they cannot get into 
 this Union with a constitution tolerating slavery. 
 If this House will only do its duly, and stand 
 firm upon this ground, if the majority will obt y 
 the will of their constituents, slavery never will be 
 extended. 
 
 No tlianks to the President, or his Secretary, or 
 his special a^ent, for the pi'ohibition of slavery in 
 the constitution of California. I believe, and think 
 I have good reason to believe, that they would 
 each have preferred that that constitution should 
 have been silent on the subject; but the disposition 
 that this House had manifested deterred southern 
 men frmn taking their slaves there, whilst the 
 newly-discovered gold mines drew iTardy adven- 
 turers from every part of the free States, and thus 
 a large majority of the people there were for free 
 soil, and the politicians made their acts conform to 
 the will of the people. 
 
 The case is different with New .Mexico. It is 
 easier of access to the southern than the northern 
 people, and hence more of the former than the lat- 
 ter will go there. No rich mines of either gold or 
 silver have as yet been discovered there to attract 
 an extraordinary number of free laborers from the 
 North to the country; and unless slavery be pro- 
 hibited there, the attempt will be made to introduce 
 it, and probably successfully made. 
 
 But, sir, within a very short time the ground 
 which this House did at first occupy, the ground 
 which the last House occupied, has been surren- 
 dered and given up, and now we are told by our 
 southern friends that the Wilmot proviso is dead 
 — that your anti-slavery cause has been abandoned 
 by the House, and that its real friends are the 
 derision of the majority. It must be exceedingly 
 gratifying to those Representatives of free north- 
 ern constituencies who voted down the Wilmot 
 proviso the other day, to be told to their faces that 
 the Wilmot proviso is dead; that it has been mur- 
 dered in the house of its friends; that its own pro- 
 fessed advocates and supporters have trampled it 
 under their I'eet. That is the way it was killed, 
 if killed it has been. But don't take that as asetiled 
 question. So far as this House can kill it, it has, 
 I confess, been killed; but I tell you it is a living, 
 abiding; principle in the hearts of the people of the 
 free States, And it may turn out after all that 
 instead of killing the Wilmot proviso those pa- 
 trioyc genilemen have only been committing 
 suicide. There are not ten men in this Hall 
 coming from free States that could have got here 
 had it been under.stood by their constituents that 
 they were opposed to the Wilmot proviso. There 
 are not two Whigs from free Slates who could 
 
 have got here had they told their conHtituenIs 
 before they were elected that they would do as 
 some of them have done since. But there has 
 been a great change going on in the public mind; 
 a marvelous light has been let in upon the minds 
 of some gentlemen. Why, when thi.s question 
 first arose this session upon the motion of the gen- 
 tleman from Georgia, [Mr. Sri,i'iiENs,] to lay the 
 resolution upon the talile, that motion was lost by 
 some eighteen or twenty majority. In three or four 
 weeks the same motion was made, and was carried 
 by 26 majority. That is very fast for even the argu- 
 ments of power and patronage to work upon 
 minds open to conviction. Yes; we get a mes- 
 sage from the President — no Executive interfer- 
 ence, of course— but we get a message recom- 
 mending non-intervention; or is it non-action.' — I 
 am not sufficiently schooled in the court dialect to 
 detect the dilFcrcnce, — and thus it is understood 
 what kind of action here will be acceptable at the 
 other end of the Avenue; and that is enough for 
 certain gentlemen. It gave them their cue; it 
 taught them the way to pay court to the powers 
 that be — to make themselves acceptable to the 
 great Taylor republican Chief and Cabinet— and 
 down went the proviso. And yet some of these 
 very gentlemen at home, a very short time since, 
 were finding fault with free soilers for not going far 
 enough on this question of free soil. I could not 
 keep up with them in Ohio when I refused to sup- 
 port such a free-soil candidate as General Taylor. 
 They doubted my sincerity. It was apparent to 
 all, that had it been believed in the South that he 
 was for the proviso, he could not have got a 
 southern electoral vote. I think there is no doubt 
 about that. And had it been known in the North 
 that he was against it, and would use his influence 
 against it — that he would send such messages to 
 Congress as he has sent since the commencement 
 of this session, he could have got but a precious 
 few there. The " indomitable anti-slavery Whigs" 
 of New York and Pennsylvania might have done 
 something for him. But out of those two States he 
 would not have gone far. It was evident that either 
 the North or South was to be deceived — the Wil- 
 mot-proviso men or the pro-slavery men. It was a 
 pretty even chance some thought; but I confess I 
 deemed the sugar plantation, with three hundred 
 slaves, woidd be a Utile dust on one side of the 
 balance. But it was nothing more than a game 
 at the best. I neither wanted to cheat nor to be 
 cheated; and hence I took no part in it. I stood 
 out. And now we find how the thing works. 
 We are to have nothing done. And here, gentle- 
 men, the friends of this Administration, who boast- 
 ed of their devotion to free-soil principles before 
 their constituents, who are in favor of doing noth- 
 ing now, vote to lay on the table the Wilmot pro- 
 viso. Not all of them do that. There are among 
 them many who do not vote at all, though they 
 are here or hereabouts. It is bad enough for gen- 
 tlemen representing constituencies in favor of the 
 proviso to vote against it, but it is worse — at least 
 I regard it as worse — for such to refu.se to vote on 
 the question. Better, sir, vote wrong tlian dodge. 
 What a scattering there was here when the yeas 
 and nays had been ordered on the motion to lay 
 my resolution on the table. Some gentlemen had 
 not even time to take their hats out with them. 
 What a number of friends we had calling on ua 
 at that moment. What a sickly season that was, 
 
6 
 
 and what a spectacle the whole thing: presented. 
 Gentlemen each representing at least 70,000 free 
 pennje, and authorized to speak and net for iheni, 
 neither j-poke nor acted at all. They, sir, are the 
 true noii-aclionisls. They carry out the views of 
 the E.xecutive in spirit and in truth. 
 
 It is nut lonsr.sir, since my friend and colleajfise 
 [iVTr Siiikvck] made an elocpient sp(;ech here^ in 
 which he liandled us Free Soilers pretty roughly, 
 because, ns he said, we had refu.sed to vole for a 
 decided and consistent friend of the proviso, and 
 had thereby contributed to the election of a slave- 
 holdinsi: Speaker. It is true that we mijlit have 
 voted for n»y friend's candidate, and possibly, with 
 our vote.-j, he might have been elected; but what 
 kind of a Speaker should we have ^ot if he had 
 been.' Why, one of the.se nonactionists. A friend 
 of the proviso, sir.' Yea, a friend 
 
 "Willing 10 wouikI, and } cl afraid tu strike " 
 the proviso. Between such a friend and an enemy, 
 I think there was not much to choose, though, as 
 a general rule, I would prefer an open enemy to a 
 skulking friend. 
 
 The friends of the Administration, by their cele- 
 brated " plur.ility rule," sought to make the Free 
 Boilers choose between their candidate and the 
 present Speaker. They sought to drive us on to 
 their favorite ground — " a choice of evils" — but we 
 would choose neither, sir. They were caught in 
 their own trap, and were constrained to vote to 
 confirm the election of the very man they had 
 professedly tried to defeat. It was very natural that i 
 ihey should feel ve.xed, still they ought not to have 
 charged the result of their bad management over 
 to the Free toilers; but they are welcome to all 
 they can make out of it. If we had even lacked 
 a good reason for our course at the time, their can- 
 didate has been so obliging as tp furnish us with 
 one since. I would suggest to my friend, that 
 when he publishes a second edition of his speech, 
 he should add a note informing his readers that the 
 Wilmot-proviso candidate, lor whom the Free 
 Soilers would not vote, would not himself vote for 
 the proviso afterwards. No, sir, he was not in his ' 
 seat, nor is he now. 
 
 There is another possible motive for the conduct 
 of the non-actionists, which has just occurred to 
 my mind; and as I ain willmg to a-scribe the best 
 motive that the case will admit of, I will state it. 
 It may be, that these gentlemen had been fore- ' 
 warned that the proviso was about to be done to 
 death, and that as their tender sensibilities would 
 not permit them to witness the execution, they 
 just stepiied out until it was over. If gentlemen 
 can think of anything better than this, I wish 
 they would suggest it. 
 
 What rciuson, Mr. Chairman, will northern 
 gentlemen, who profess to be ofiposed to the ex- 
 tension of .slavery, and who yet voted against the 
 proviso or refused to vote at all, give for their ac- 
 tion or their non-action.' Thus far they have been 
 as dumb a.s fish; but some of the newspapers have 
 reasons as thick as blackberries for both sorts of 
 gentlemen. ' 
 
 First, they say the resolution wad premature. 
 Was it any more premature the other day than it 
 was a nuinlh before.' Why did not they vole to ■ 
 lay it on the table when it was first offered .' Is it 
 any more premature now than it was at the last 
 session of Congress? and yet at that session a i 
 similar resolution was pa.s9ed by ihc House, and i 
 
 it called forth two bills — one for California and 
 the other for New Mexico. Was a bill any more 
 necessary for New Mexico then than now.' It is 
 a little singular to find these gentlemen following 
 in the footsteps of General Cass so closely in all 
 respects He, you may -remember, was vocifer- 
 ous for the proviso in August, 1846, at the close 
 of the first session of the twenty-iiimh Congress, 
 when he regretted exceedingly that Governor Da- 
 vis defeated it by his ill-timed speech, as he called 
 it. At the next session it was premHture, and at 
 the next it was unconstitutional. When will 
 these gentlemen arrive at that point also .' Shortly, 
 sir, if thty keep the course they have started upon. 
 Next they say it is unnecessary. Unnecessary! 
 I Why was not this found out in 1848.' That was 
 one of General C.4ss's excuses then, and nobody 
 denounced him for it more than these same geiule- 
 j men. 1 have already stated nriy views on this 
 point. II gentlemen have any other reasons to 
 give, they may give them themselves. I have 
 mentioned their two best — no, not theirs, for they 
 borrowed them both,, or rather picked them up 
 after the owner had thrown them away. 
 
 The Democratic Representatives from free States, 
 who still adhere to the Cass doctrine of " non-in- 
 tervention," would of course vote against the pro- 
 viso. Nothing else was expected of them; but 
 there are some who have professed to be in favor 
 of the proviso, and yet voted against it the other 
 day, and others who didn't vote at all. Have 
 they returned to their first love.' Didn't they get 
 enough of non-intervention at the last Presidential 
 I electioni or do they still hope to make another trial 
 with the same or a similar candidate.' Do they 
 still hope to conciliate the South — poor men.' 
 ; I rejoice, Mr. Chairman, to be able to say that 
 there are many (1 wish there were more) represent- 
 atives from the free States, in this House, of both 
 the great political parties, who not only talk in favor 
 of Free Soil at home, but vote in favor of it here. 
 Gentlemen who can neither be prevailed upon by 
 threats on the one hand, nor cajoleries on the other, 
 to swerve from their |ninci|)les or their duty; and 
 however niuch I may differ with thejn on other 
 questions, whilst this great question of the exten- 
 sion or non-extension of slavery reinains open and 
 unsettled, and whilst I hold a seat in this Hall, it 
 will be honor enough for me to bear my humble 
 part with them in our common effort to restrict 
 slavery, at least to its present limits. If my voice 
 could reach their constituencies, 1 would say to 
 every true Free Soiler among them — look to it that 
 your representatives be well sustained at home. 
 
 Now gentlemen talk about what will happen if 
 the North shall continue its " aggressions. " This 
 is a purely speculative question, for I suppose, as 
 far as this Congress is concerned, there is to be 
 no further aggression. No; this agi;ressive policy 
 is stopped; it has ceased. But, f have said, and 
 :;etitlenien must pardon me if I still say and be- 
 lieve it too — that there is but one thing iTiore ab- 
 surd than this talk about the dissolution of the 
 Union; and that i.3, the alarm which s>ome gentle- 
 men feel about it. Dis.solve the Union! It is a 
 mure speculative question, because the Norih»will 
 not go on aggre.ssing. No; so many northern 
 Representatives have already backed out of the 
 proviso. And, judging from what has been the 
 effect of these " Holcmii warnings" upon them, we 
 can come at least to a guess as to what they will 
 
do in future. A stranijer coming in here fresh 
 from the people might s;et some (|ucer notions con- 
 cerning; the object and policy of ilie rcd-liot s(>vech- 
 es iluu we sometimes lieur frcjiii our soullicrn 
 friends. Uut, Mr. Chairman, nothing lells like 
 thenj upon this House — nothing, sir. I don't 
 question the sincerity of gentlemen at all. But 
 if I could question ii I should stdl be oltliged to 
 admit that the thing was well done -that it was 
 politic at least — for it works lik-- a charm. These 
 *' solemn warnings" knocked tlie free-soil out of 
 some of the Representatives from tlie free States 
 as the fla.K-dre.*ser whips out shives. 
 
 This work of dissolving the Union would, if 
 the" North were lo stand up to its position, be 
 found a very different business from what some 
 gentlemen seem to suppose. 1 remarked in the 
 first part of the session that whatever might turn 
 up, however the Union might bf dissolved, gentle- 
 men ^ad better make their calculations upon one 
 thing as settled, that the Mi.ssis.^ippi river will be 
 free as long as water fliDws in it. 1 say so still. 
 1 have Iteeii a little misquoted by tiie gentleman 
 from Alabama [Mr. Hilliard] and thegenileman 
 from North Carolina, [Mr. Cli.vg.man,] who repre- 
 sented me as having spoken of the moulli of the 
 Mississippi merely. Gentlemen, we cannot take 
 up with the moutli of the Mississippi. No, you 
 cannot get off in that way; but 1 tell you the 
 whole Missisjsippi, from its mouth to its source — 
 whatever your southern convention may do, what- 
 ever resolves they may pass — will remain forever 
 free to the people of the old Northwestern Territo- 
 ry. Aye, the children of the first born of the ordi- 
 nance of 1787 svould float up and down that river 
 free whenever and as long as they please. That you 
 may rely upon. And my friend from North Caro- 
 lina [.Vlr. Cling.man'] would get his ideas a good 
 deal enlarged upon that subject if, instead of going 
 to Saratoga and Newport, laying baits for " valen- 
 tines," (a laugh,) he will come out to the Northwest, 
 if he will look at our rivers and scrutinize closely 
 the lads who navigate them. If he will go to the 
 wharves of Pittsburg or Cincinnati; if he will go to 
 any of our western river towns he will conclude at 
 once that it would be the most difficult thing in the 
 world to prevent the western boys from going the 
 whole length of the Mississifipi and back again — 
 out and back, sir, at their own will and pleasure. 
 Not that i doubt the chivalry, the gallantry and 
 courage of the southern people. Not even the 
 vaunting of that gallantry of which we have had 
 a spice, can bring it under suspicion with me. 
 Why, 1 would not own them for fellow-citizens if 
 I did not think them brave. But 1 must say that 
 a less gallant people might have their courage 
 brought under suspicion by some of the talks we 
 have heard. It is not the way folks confident in 
 their own strength ordinarily talk. But then it 
 depends a good deal u[(on how they have been 
 brought up. [A laugh.] 
 
 Dissolve the Union ! How will it work ? 
 Suppose you do meet in convention and resolve 
 that the Union is dissolved, will that absolve the 
 President of his official oath.' Will he not stand 
 there still clothed with the authority, armed with 
 
 the power to execute the laws of the land ? And 
 would they be executed.' Well, ihey would. 
 There is no mistake about it. It would be right 
 in his line of business. And let me suggest to 
 you another thing that would follow as an inevit- 
 able consequence, the Hlar-spanglcd banner, the 
 s|iread-eiigle, and so forth, with fifes and drums, 
 andalllhat sort of thing, would be paraded through 
 your States. I will say one word more — a mere 
 muter of opinion of course — that you had bet- 
 ter have a Frederic Douglass on every planta- 
 tion of the South, lecturing upon the " God-given 
 ri'^'hts of man," than to have this kind of military 
 fuss and parade among you. It wouldn't be fa- 
 vorable to your "peculiar'' institution. [Laughter.] 
 It would go a great way to enlighten your slaves 
 as to the real, not market, value of we<ik heads 
 a.id strong arms — the very material for mobs and 
 insurrections. And if there is any institution on 
 the face of the earth — not excepting the despotism 
 of Russia — that should be conservative — that 
 should shun everything like civil war, insurrection, 
 or mob violence — that should avoid everything 
 which goes to teach men with arms that they can, 
 if they only make the right kind of an issue, over- 
 come men with brains — it is your institution of 
 slavery. And it may be, or rather might be, if 
 we were now to have the will of the majority of 
 the people of this country carried out, and you 
 were to remain in your present frame of mind, 
 that you would rush upon a crisis that would 
 make it necessary for you to speedily execute 
 in part what is evidently the decree of God — the 
 extermination of slavery throughout the world. 
 You might produce a state of things which would 
 make it necessary to bring about, so far as this 
 country is concerned, this result by your own 
 means; aye, you might arouse and bring into 
 action the war power — which is almost unlimited 
 by the Constitution — the war power — the military 
 despotism, that would use your slaves just as it 
 would fuel or fodder, to promote its own success. 
 When opposing armies should be marching and 
 counter-marching through your land, do you sup- 
 pose that you could keep all your slaves quiet? 
 Would they be likely to remain neutral in a civil 
 war? 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I find that without touching 
 upon some topics to which I had intended to al- 
 lude, my time is almost exhausted. I regret as 
 much as any man can that the North — the free 
 States, by their Representatives here — have fallen 
 (in their works) so far short of the faith they pro- 
 fessed. But I avow it as my opinion, as my de- 
 cided opinion, that those Representatives have 
 mistaken the will of their constituents. And, 
 though I certainly make no threats, and would 
 not, if I had the power to execute them, I believe 
 that those gentlemen who have found it consistent 
 with their sense of duty to vote down the proviso, 
 or evade voting upon it at all, will get more light 
 in one week after they reach their homes, than 
 they did in eight weeks after they arrived here — 
 and that was a great deal. 
 
 My time is so nearly out, that I will detain the 
 committee no longer. 
 
 Piiiiii.d at tlie Coiigreasional Globe Office. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 898 400 6 ^, 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 898 400 6 C