B 
 .6^ 
 
LETTER 
 
 ALBERT G. BROWN, 
 
 TO HIS CONSTITUENTS. 
 
 FkliowCitizevs: I feel impelled, by a strong 
 dense of duty, to address to you this communica- 
 don. If it shall seem to you more appropriate that I 
 should have delivered the sentiments which follow, 
 in the form of a speech in the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, I reply, that the difficulty of obtaining 
 ':he floor interposes at all times serious obstacles 
 "o that mode of address. At this period of excite- 
 ment, when events of the greatest consequence are 
 [pursuing each other in rapid succession, it appears 
 "o me neither wise nor safe to risk the doubtful 
 ciiances of an early opportunity of addressing you 
 through the ordinary medium of a congressional 
 speech . 
 
 Events of the utmost magnitude are transpiring 
 at the seat of the National Government. Ih these 
 ayente you have a deep interest, and I would not 
 I-eave you a single day in ignorance of rny views, 
 or in doubt as to the manner in which I mean to 
 discharge the high and important trusts which 
 your partiality has devolved upon me. 
 
 It is well known to you, that the people in Cali- 
 fornia, following the lead of General Riley, an 
 officer of the United States army stationed in that 
 country, took upon themselves, during the last 
 summer, the responsible task of forming a State 
 constitution, and setting up a State government in 
 ;hat territory. 
 
 This proceeding has been extensively criticised, 
 and very generally condemned, as altogether 
 anomalous and irregular. It is no part of tny pres- 
 ent purpose to follow up these criticisms. That 
 i;he whole proceeding was irregular and in total 
 disregard of the rights of the South, i.s beyond 
 dispute. That it was basely fraiiduknt, I have «ver 
 believed, and do now belir.ve. That the people in 
 that country were j)ronipted to the course pursued 
 by them, by the secret spies and agents sent out 
 from Washington, I have never doubted for a 
 
 single moment. That they were induced to insert 
 the " Wilmot proviso," in their so-called State 
 constitution, by assurances held out to them that 
 such a course would facilitate their admission into 
 the Union of these States, I as religiously beliere 
 as I do in the existence of an overruling Provi- 
 dence. 
 
 Pursuing the idea that there had been illegitimate 
 influences at work to produce particular results in 
 California, I on two several occasions introduced 
 into the House of Representatives resolutions 
 directing a searching inquiry into all the facta. 
 But the dominant p©wer would give no counte- 
 nance to my object. 
 
 I have seen it stated in a letter written in Cali- 
 fornia, and published in the Republic newspaper 
 in this city, that " it was everywhere understood 
 in that country, that the President desired the 
 people of California to settle the slavery question 
 for themselves." I endeavored to bring the public 
 mind to bear on this point, and in a card published 
 in the Republic, I inquired " how it came to be 
 everywhere thus understood;" but no response 
 was ever made to the inquiry. The semi-official 
 declaration, however, quickened my suspicions that 
 some one had spoken as by authority for the Presi- 
 dent. 
 
 Thomas Butler King, esq., one of the Presi- 
 dent's agents in California, has repeatedly de- 
 clared that the California Convention was held 
 under the sanction of President Polk and Secreta- 
 ries Buchanan and Marcy; and that it was to 
 these functionaries General Riley made allusion 
 when he said to the people in that country that he 
 was acting in compliance with the views of (he 
 President, and the Secretaries of War and of State. 
 Mr. Polk is dead, and the two ex-Secretarie« 
 positively deny the truth of Mr, King's declara- 
 tioa, 
 
£4^3 
 
 If General Riley stated officially to the people 
 of California, on the 3d of June, 1849, the date of 
 his proclamation, that the President, the Secre- 
 tary of War, and the Secretary of State approved 
 his conduct — meaning thereby Mr. Polk, Mr. 
 Buchanan, and Mr. Marcy — it was a fraud upon 
 the people of California. The statement could 
 only have been made with a view to give the 
 highest official .sanction to his conduct, and he knew i 
 perfectly well that all three of the gentlemen allu- i 
 ded to, were private citizens at the date of his 
 proclamation. When he said the President, he 
 meant to give the weight of presidential influence 
 to his acts. He meant that the people should un- 
 derstand him as alluding to the man in power, 
 and not to a retired gentleman and private citizen. 
 
 Mr. King undertakes to prove that he is right 
 in his declaration, and asserts that the steamer 
 which carried him to California was the first arri- 
 val in that country after General Taylor "s inaugu- 
 ration, and ^^ that she conveyed the first intelligence 
 that Congress had failed to provide a government for 
 that territory;^' and by way of giving point to his 
 declaration in this respect, he asserts that he landed 
 for the first time at San Francisco, on the 4th day 
 of June; that General Riley was then at Monterey, 
 distant about one hundred and fifty miles, and 
 that he (Mr. King) did not see him, (Riley,) or 
 have any communication with him; and that the 
 proclamation, calling the California Convention, 
 bore date June 3d, 1849. Thus rendering it im- 
 possible, as he assumed, that said proclamation 
 could have been based on information received from 
 the present President and his Secretaries through 
 his, Mr. King's arrival. Unfortunately for the 
 accuracy of these statements and the legitimacy 
 of the conclusions. General Riley commences his 
 proclamation with the emphatic declaration " that 
 Congress had failed to provide a government for 
 Cfilifornia;" and the inquiry at once arises, how, 
 if Mr. King landed at San Francisco on the 4th of 
 June, 1849, with the ^rst intelligence of this failure 
 on the part of Congress, could General Riley have 
 known and proclaimed the important fact at Mon- 
 terey, distant one hundred and fifty miles, on the 
 3d of June of that year ? We see at once that it 
 could not be so. 
 
 President Polk and hia Cabinet could not have 
 eent advice to California of this failure on the part 
 of Congress; for it is historically true that the fail- 
 ure occurred in the very last hour of Mr. Polk's 
 administrution. 
 
 Through some channel. General Riley was ad- 
 vised that Congress had failed to provide a govcrn- 
 roent for California, and this after President Taylor 
 came ;into power. 1 do not say that Mr. King 
 
 was this channel, but I do say that from the same 
 medium through which he derived the information 
 that Congress had failed to provide a government, 
 he may, and probably did , receive also the views of 
 the President and his Cabinet, and hence he was 
 enabled to speak as he did with positive certainty 
 of the one and of the other. 
 
 " You are fully possessed," says the Secretary 
 of State, Mr. Clayton, to Mr. King, in a letter 
 bearing date of April 3, 1849, " You are fully pos- 
 ' sessed of the President's views, and can with 
 ' propriety suggest to the people of California the 
 ' ADOPTION of measures best calculated to give them 
 ♦ eftect. These measures must, of course, origi- 
 ' nale solely with themselves." Mr. King, then, 
 was informed that he could with propriety suggest 
 the adoption of measwes to carry out the Presi- 
 dent's views, he having been fully possessed of 
 those views. But these measures must originate 
 with the people! Beautiful! Mr. King is sent 
 to California to suggest to the people the adoption 
 o( measures to carry out the President's views, but 
 these measures must originate with the people! 
 And more beautiful still, Mr. King comes home, 
 after disburdening himself of the views whereof 
 he was " fully possessed," and gravely tells the 
 country he did not go to California on a political 
 mission, and had nothing to do with the local 
 affairs of that country; and this, too, after he was 
 denounced in the Convention as the President's 
 emissary. I suspect Mr. King could tell how it 
 came to be "everywhere understood in California 
 that the President wanted the people to settle the 
 slavery question for themselves." 
 
 I have thought proper to present these facts and 
 deductions, for the purpose of showing you that 
 mine are no idle suspicions. When I say that, in 
 my opinion, a great fraud has been perpetrated, I 
 want you to understand that there is some founda- 
 tion for my opinion. 
 
 The action of Congress, I am free to admit, may 
 
 have had much to do in fixing the sentiment in the 
 
 mind of the President and of the Californians, that 
 
 no territorial government would be allowed which 
 
 did not contain the Wilmot proviso; and judging 
 
 : from the temper constantly displayed in urging this 
 
 ] odious measure at all times and in all seasons, it was, 
 
 I grant, a rational conclusion that no government 
 
 I asked for or establisiied by the people would be 
 
 I tolerated unless slavery was prohibited; but was 
 
 this a sufficient reason why the President or his 
 
 agents, or even the people of California, sliould 
 
 trample under foot the rights of the South i We 
 
 had our rights in that country, and they ought to 
 
 have been respected; I risk nothing in saying that 
 
 ' they would have been, had we been the stronger 
 
uts-Ba i 
 
 ir.iif 
 
 8 
 
 party. Our fault consisted in our weakness, and 
 for Ihia we were ■sacrificed. 
 
 It is said, I know, that California is not suited 
 to slave labor — that the soil, climate, the very 
 elements themselves, are opposed to it. Slave labor 
 is never more profitably employed than in mining; 
 fsnd you may judge whether slaves could be 
 advantageously introduced into that country, when 
 i inform you, on the authority of the debates of 
 :heir convention, thatan able-bodied negro is worth 
 in California from two to six thousand dollars per 
 annwni. 
 
 I pass over the studied and systematic resistance 
 which the California admissionists have constantly 
 .^nd steadily interposed against all investigation, 
 with this single remark — " that the wicked flee 
 when no man pursueth, but the righteous are as bold 
 as a lion." 
 
 Imraediaiely after the assembling of the present 
 Congress, it became apparent that the admission 
 of Califoraia into the Union as a State was to be- 
 ^ome the great question of the session ; and it was 
 palpable from the beginning, that there was a large 
 majority in favor of it. The President was not 
 5I0W in taking his position. He brought the sub- 
 ject to the/avoraftknoticeof Congress in his annual 
 .message, and very soon after, in a special commu- 
 nication, he earnestly recommended it to our favor- 
 able consideration. The fearful odds of the Presi- 
 dent, the Cabinet, and a congressional majority, 
 was arrayed again.st us; but, nothing daunted, a 
 few of us, relying on the justice of our cause, and 
 placing our trust in the intelligence, virtue, patriot- 
 ism, and indomitable firmness and courage of our 
 constituents, resolved to resist it. 
 
 To lay before you the grounds of that resistance, 
 and to lay bare the sophistry and double-dealing 
 of the friends of this measure, are among the chief 
 aims of this letter. 
 
 A large class of those who advocate the imme- 
 diate introduction of California into the Union, 
 place their advocacy on the ground that the people 
 have a right in all oases to govern themselves, and 
 10 regulate their domestic concerns in their own 
 way. It becomes important to understand the 
 '.meaning of declarations like these, and to ascertain 
 the extent to which such doctrines may be right- 
 fully extended. 
 
 I admit the right of self-government; I admit 
 that every people may regulate their domestic 
 affairs in their own way; I freely and fully admit 
 the doctrine that a people finding themselves in a 
 country without laws, may make laws for them- 
 selves, and to suit themselves. But in doing this 
 'hey must take care not to infringe the rights of 
 ■ihe owners and proprietors of the soil. If, for ex- 
 
 ample, one hundred or one thousand American 
 citizens should find themselves thrown on an 
 island belonging to Great Britain, uninhabited and 
 without laws, such citizens, from the very neces- 
 sity of their position, would have a right to make 
 laws for themselves. But in doing this, they 
 would have no right to say to her Majesty's sub- 
 jects in Scotland, you may come to this island with 
 your property, and to her Irish subjects, you shall 
 not come with your property. They would have 
 no right to setlheproprietorsat defiance, or to make 
 insulting discriminations between proprietors hold- 
 ing one species of property and those owning another 
 species of property. No such power would be at all 
 necessary to their self-government, and any attempt 
 to exercise it would justly be regarded as an im- 
 pertinent attempt to assume the supreme power, 
 when in fact they were mere tenants at will. 
 
 If the people of California, who had been left by 
 the unwise and grossly unjust non-action of Con- 
 gress, without law and without government, had 
 confined themselves to making their own laws and 
 regulating their own domestic affairs in their own 
 way, I certainly never should have raised my 
 voice against their acts. But when they go further, 
 and assume the right to say what shall be the priv- 
 ileges of the owners and proprietors of the soil — 
 when they takeupon themselves to say to the fifteen 
 northern States, your citizens may come here with 
 their property, and to the fifteen southern States, 
 your citizens shall not come here with their property, 
 they assume, in my judgment, a power which 
 does not belong to them, and perform an act to 
 which the South, if she would maintain her rights, 
 ought not to submit. 
 
 Attempts have been made to draw a parallel 
 between the conduct of our revolutionary fathers, 
 who claimed the right to legislate independent of 
 the British Crown, and that of the Californiana, 
 who have assumed to set up an independent gov- 
 ernment of their own. When our fathers set up 
 an independent Government, they called it revolu- 
 tion; and if the people in California set up a like 
 Government, I know of no reason w-hy their con- 
 duct shall not in like manner be denominated rev- 
 olutionary. Our fathers revolted and took the 
 consequences; California has a right to do the same 
 thing; but that she has any other than a.revolulion- 
 ary right, I utterly deny. 
 
 Very distinguished men have assumed the posi- 
 tion, that the rights of sovereignty over the terri- 
 tory reside in the people of the territory, even 
 during their territorial existence. Let us test the 
 soundness of this theory by a few practical appli- 
 cations. The expression " the people of a terri- 
 tory" is one of very uncertain signification as to 
 
rk 
 
 E4XZ 
 
 numbers. It may mean one hundred thousand, or 
 it may mean one thousand or one hundred. The 
 question naturally presents itself, when does this 
 right of Bovereignty commence? 1? it with the 
 first man who reaches the territory ? May he pre- 
 ■cribe rules and regulations for those who come 
 after him ? or must there be a thousand or fifty 
 thousand , or a greater or a less number, before the 
 rights of sovereignty attach ? 
 
 Perhaps we are told that the sovereignty begins 
 when the people assemble to make laws. Very 
 ■well; let us put this theory into practical operation. 
 Ten thousand French emigrants have settled, let 
 us suppose, al the base of thp Rocky Mountains, 
 without the limits of any organized State or Terri- 
 tory of the United States, and they are without 
 government or laws. They make laws for them- 
 selves, and you acquiesce; they set up a govern- 
 ment for themselves, and you admit their right; 
 they claim the sovereignty over the territory and 
 set up an independent State government, and you 
 admit their power to do so. You expect them to 
 ask admission into the Union, but the new sover- 
 eignty says no, we prefer independence, or we 
 prefer to become an integral part of the French Re- 
 public. What will you do under such circum- 
 stancee? Can you force her to abandon her ac- 
 knowledged independence ? Can you force her 
 into the Union against her will ? What ! require 
 a sovereign to pursue your will and not her own ? 
 This would indeed be revolution. 
 
 If California is in fact, as she is admitted by 
 some to be in theory, an independent sovereignty, 
 1 see nothing which is to prevent her remaining 
 out of the Union if she elects to do so. I see 
 nothing which may prevent her, if she chooses, 
 allying herself to any other nation or country. I 
 know of no right by which this Government may 
 take from her the independence, the sovereignty 
 •which she now possesses, if indeed she be a State 
 without the Union. 
 
 The tenure by which wc hold our territorial 
 possession is indeed most fragile, if this doctrine of 
 territorial sovereignty can be maintained. We 
 may expend millions of treasure, and pour out 
 rivers of our purest and best blood in the acquisi- 
 tion of territories, only to see them taken posses 
 sion of, and ourselves turned out, by the first in- 
 terloper who may chance to plant his foot upon 
 Ihcm. 
 
 I am always glnd of an opportunity to do the 
 fullest justice to n political opponent, and in this 
 spirit I beg leave to say, that, in my judgment, Mr. 
 Clav, in u late spccrli in the Senate, took the true 
 ground on this nubject. He denied that California 
 was a Sltite, or that she rould become so out of 
 
 the Union. He maintained the right of the peo- 
 ple to self-government, but denie'd the validity or 
 binding force of their written constitution, untiJ 
 the State should be admitted into the Union. Will 
 the reader recollect this, as I shall have occasior 
 to use it in another connection. 
 
 Let us pause for a moment to consider the hon- 
 esty and sincerity of purpose with which the lofty 
 pretension has been set up in certain quarters, that 
 the people have a right to regulate, arrange, and 
 mould their institutions to suit themselves. In the 
 early part of last year, the people inhabiting a large 
 portion of our unoccupied possessions in what was 
 then known as New Mexico and California, met 
 in convention and framed a State constitution, giv- 
 ing the name of Deseret to their country. They 
 defined their boundaries, and included within their 
 limits a large extent of Pacific coast. Their con- 
 stitution was in every element essentially republi- 
 can. They sent their agent to Washington, with 
 a modest request that the constitution thus formed 
 should be accepted, and the State of Deeehet ad- 
 mitted into the Union. How this application was 
 treated we shall presently see. Later in the same 
 year, the people of New Mexico formed a territo- 
 rial government, and sent their delegate to Wash- 
 ington to present their wishes, and, if permitted, to 
 represent their interests. In the summer of the 
 same year, and several months after the Deseret 
 convention, the Californians held their convention. 
 They extended their boundaries so as to monopo- 
 lize the whole Pacific coast, in total disregard of 
 the prior action of Deseret. And then in contempt 
 of the modest example of her two neighbors, she 
 sends, not an agent or a delegate ta Washington, 
 with a civil request, but she sends up two Sena- 
 tors and two Representatives, with a bold demand 
 for instantaneous admission into the Union. 
 
 What followed ? The President made two 
 earnest appeals to Congress to admit California, 
 and he told us plainly to leave the others to their 
 fate. Not only does he fail to give them afrtendly 
 salutation, but he in truth turns from them in 
 scorn. Not a word does he utter in their behalf, 
 or in defence of their independent conduct. Their 
 modesty failed to commend them to his patcrna". 
 notice. 
 
 In Congress, and throughout the country, a gen- 
 eral outcry is now heard in favor of Califarnia. 
 Everywhere throughout the length and breadth of 
 tiie land, the cry of California, glorious California, 
 is heard. It comes to us from the East and from 
 the West, from the North and ([ am pained to say") 
 in some instances from the South. If any mar 
 has dared to interpose the slightest objection to the 
 immediate admis.sion of California— if any onf 
 
has hesitated about yielding to California all that 
 she so boldly demands, he has been denounced, 
 black-balled, hooted at, and almost driven from 
 society. Mean time no voice has been heard in 
 defence of the rights of New Mexico and Deseret. 
 They, too, assumed to settle their own affairs 
 in their own way. Vet no whisper of encourage- 
 ment and hope greets their modest agent and dele 
 
 eluded slavery, and sent two Senators and two 
 
 Representatives to Wnehington. 
 
 You will have no difficulty in determining in 
 your own minds that I am opposed to allowing the 
 people of the territories to settle this question, 
 either for us or against us. It is a matter with 
 which they have no concern. The Slates are 
 equals and have equal rights, and whatever tend.? 
 
 gate at Washington. The great national voice is ij to impair or break down that equality, always has 
 engaged to sing and shout for California. Why | and always shall encounter my stern and inflexible 
 has this been so ? Why this marked distinction { opposition. 
 
 between these several parties? The people, we i| My position in reference to congressional action 
 are told, have a right to act for themselves. Cali- jj on this subject is easily explained. I am for non- 
 fomia acted for herself, Deseret for herself, and '' intervention— total, entire, unqua'ified non-inter- 
 
 New Mexico for herself; and yet, amid the din ! 
 and clamor in favor of California, we have lost 
 sight of her more retiring and modest sisters. Why i 
 is this ? I'll tell you, fellow-citizens. Deseret and 
 New Mexico did not insult the South by excluding i 
 .slavery. With a becoming modesty they were ■ 
 silent on this subject. California, influenced by I 
 unwisecounselsj flung defiance in your teeth, scoffed | 
 at your rights, and boldly threw herself into the , 
 arms of the North. Here is the secret of all this ■ 
 boiling and bubbling in favor of California, and j 
 here, too, may be found the end of the great j 
 doctrine that the people may settle the slavery 1 
 question for themselves. If they settle it against j 
 the South it is well, and if they do not it is no set- i 
 tlement at all. 
 
 Ah! but we are told there is a vast difference | 
 between these territories; New Mexico and Utah 
 have but few inhabitants, and California has 
 many thousand — some say one hundred thousand ' 
 and some say two hundred thousand. I do not 
 understand that because a people are fewer in 
 number that therefore they have no political rights, 
 
 vention. Leave the people of all the Slates free to 
 go with their property of whatever kind , to the terri- 
 tories, without let and without hindrance, and i 
 am satisfied. But this I must say, that whenever 
 Congress, undertakes to give protection to property 
 in the territories, on the high seas, or anywhere 
 else, there must be no insulting discrimination be- 
 tween slave property and any other species of 
 property. To say that Congress may protect the 
 northern man's goods in California, but that Con- 
 gress shall not protect the southern man's slaves, is 
 intervenlion. It is intervening for the worst ends, 
 and in the most insulting manner. 
 
 You have been told, fellow-ciiizens, that we once 
 said the people of a territory, when they come to 
 make a State constitution, might settle the slave 
 question for themselves, and that we have now 
 abandoned that ground. Not so— I speak for my- 
 self. I have always maintained, and I maintain 
 to-day, that the people of a territory, when duly 
 authorized to form a State constitution, may settle 
 this and all other questions for themselves and ac- 
 cording to their own inclinations. But was Cali- 
 fornia duly authorized? Where did she get her 
 
 whilst a greater number may have every right. 
 But how stands the case in regard to these hundreds j: authority? We have been told that she got it frotrj 
 of thousand of people in California? We all know J! the Almighty. This is very well if it is so. But 
 that the emigration to that country has been j it would be more satisfactory to me to know that 
 confined to hardy male adults, robust men. In j she got it from the proprietors of the soil, and that 
 most cases their families and friends have been left > heraction had been subordinate to the Federal Con- 
 in the States, to which, in four eases out of five, ' stitution. 
 they themselves have intended to return. At the ,i I have no inclination to discuss this point at 
 
 elections last summer they voted about twelve thou- 
 sand, and later in the fall, on the important ques- 
 tion of adopting a State constitution, with the 
 ballot-box wide open and free for every vote, they 
 polled less than thirteen thousand. I should like to 
 know where the balance of this two hundred thou- 
 sand were. At least one hundred and fifty thousand 
 of them I suspect were never in the country, and 
 
 length. Whenever it can be shown that California 
 has been subjected to the same ordeal through 
 which Mississippi, Arkansas, Florida, and other 
 slaveholding States have been compelled to pass, 
 1 will, if in Congress, vote for her admission 
 into the Union, without a why or wherefore, as 
 concerns slavery. But it is iisking of me a little 
 too much to expect that I shall vote for her admis- 
 
 the rest regarded the whole thing as a ridiculous i^ sion, underallthercmarkablecircumstancesattend- 
 farce, with which they had nothing to do. And, ing her application, until she has passed this ordeal, 
 this is the Slate and these the people who have ex- !; If it shall be shown that i am getting a fair 
 

 6 
 
 eguivlaent for surrendering your rights in Califor- 
 nia, you may reasonably expect me, in your name, 
 to favour a compromise. The great national mind 
 wants repose, and I for one am ready for any 
 arrangement which may atford a reasonable augu- 
 ry of a happy adjustment of our difierences. 
 This brings me to a brief review of Mr. Clay's 
 so called compromise scheme. 
 
 The leading bill presented by Mr. Clay from 
 " the Committee of Thirteen " contains three dis- 
 tinct and substantive propositions: First, the ad- 
 mission of California. In this, as in eveiy other 
 scheme of settlement tendered to the South, Cali- 
 forn-ia in all her length and breadth, stands first. 
 Secondly, we are offered territorial governments 
 for New Mexico and Utah, (Deseret that was,) 
 without the Wilmot proviso: and thirdly, we have 
 a proposition to dismember Texas, by cutting off 
 enough of her northern possessions to make four 
 States as large as Mississippi, and for the privi- 
 lege of doing this we are to pay millions of 
 
 dollars. The suggestions for filling this blank 
 have varied from five to fifteen millions of dollars. 
 
 I have already suggested some reasons why the 
 admissicn of California, as an independent propo- 
 sition, ought not, in my judgment, to receive your 
 sanction. I now propose to inquire whether the 
 union of these three measures in one bill makes 
 the whole, as a unit, more worthy of your consi- 
 deration and support. All the objections to the 
 admission of California stand outin the same force 
 and vigor in Mr. Clay's bill as in all former propo- 
 sitions for her admission. We are asked to make 
 the same sacrifice of feeling and of principle which 
 we have so often and so long protested we v/ould 
 not make — unless indeed it shall be shown 
 that we are getting a fair equivalent for these 
 sacrifices. Mr. Clay has himself told us, in effect, 
 that we were making these sacrifices. He has 
 told us, as I remarked to you in another place, 
 that California was not a State, and could not 
 become so out of the Union. That, in truth, 
 her constitution had no binding force, as a con- 
 stitution, until the State was admitted into the 
 Union. The constitution of California contains 
 the anti-slavery clause, the " Wilmot proviso." 
 But the constitution is a dead letter, so far as we 
 are concerned. It has no vitality, no binding effect 
 until the State is admitted. Congress admits her, 
 And by the act of admission puts the proviso in 
 force— gives it activity and life. Who, then, but 
 Congress is responsible for the active, opera- 
 tive " proviso — for that provisio which excludes 
 you froni the country.' Congress and Congress 
 alone is responsible. You can now understand 
 more fully what I meant, when I signed a letter to 
 his Excellency the Governor, saying, " that the 
 adinission of California was equivalent to the 
 adoption of the Wilmot proviso." The northern 
 people understand this, and to a man they are for 
 her admission. 
 
 Tlie question now is, arc we offered any ade- 
 quate consideration for making thi.s sacrifice 
 of feeling and of principle? This is a question 
 worthy of liie most serious and critical examina- 
 tion. 
 
 Ky the terms of the icsolutions, annexing Texas 
 to the United Slates, it is expressly provided " that 
 auch States as may be formed out of that portion of 
 her territory lying South of purullel of.%" 30' north 
 JBtitude, shall be admitted into the Union with or 
 
 without slavery, as the people of each State asking 
 
 admission may desire." And it is as expressly 
 stipulated, that " in such State or STATEsas may 
 be formed out of said territory lying ninth of that 
 line slavery shall be prohibited." In pur.^uance 
 of these resolutions Texas caine into tiie Union. 
 The South consented to this arrangement, and to- 
 day, as at all former periods, I am ready to abide 
 by it. 
 
 Examine these resolutions, and what do we find.' 
 A clear and distinct recognition of the title of 
 Texas to the country up to 36° 30', as slave ter- 
 ritory, for it is stipulated that the people may deter- 
 mine for themselves, at a proper time, whether sla- 
 very shall orshall not exist in all the ciiuntry below 
 that line. Nay more, the rights of Texas above 
 this line are admitted; for it is expressly provided 
 that in the State or States to be formed out of the 
 territory north of 36° 30', slavery shall be pro- 
 hibited, but not until such State or States ask ad- 
 mission into the Union. We have, then, the clearest 
 possible recognition of the title of Texas up to 
 364° as slave territory, and to sufficient territory 
 above that line to make one or more States. 
 
 Now, what do we hear from the North .' That 
 Texas never had any just claim to any part of this 
 territory; that it always did, and does now belong 
 to New Mexico. But, as Texas is a young sis- 
 ter, and one with whom we should not deal 
 
 harshly, we will give her millions of dollars 
 
 for her imaginary claim. Mr. Benton, in the 
 exuberance of his liberality, offers fifteen millions 
 of dollars; and other gentlemen, less ardent, pro pose 
 smaller sums. But our present dealing is with 
 Mr. Clay's plan for a compromise. 
 
 If the reader has a map, I beg that he will first 
 trace the line of thirty-six degrees and thirty min- 
 utes, north latitude; and then fix his eye on the 
 northeastern boundary of Texas at the point 
 where the one-hundredth parallel of longitude 
 crosses the Red river; and, from this point, 
 run a direct line to a point twenty miles above 
 El Passo, on the Rio Grande; and between these 
 two lines, he will have the slave terriloinj which 
 Mr. Clay's compromise proposes to sell out. It 
 will be seen, on comparison, that this territory is 
 nearly twice as large as the State of Mississippi. 
 Whether five or fifteen millions of dollars are 
 given for it, it is needless to say we shall have to 
 pay more than our due proportion of the money. 
 
 To me, it is not a pleasant thing to sell out 
 slave territory, and pay for it myself; and I con- 
 fess that this much of the proposed bargain has 
 not made the admission of California a whit more 
 palatable to me. 
 
 1 say nothing of Texas above 36° 30'; that 
 country was virtually surrendered to abolition by 
 the terms of the Texas annexation. If Texas 
 thinks proper to give it or sell it to the Frce-Soil- 
 ers, in advance of the time appointed for its sur- 
 render, I make no objection. But all the South 
 has a direct political interest in Texas below this 
 line of 36° 30'; and I do not mean to surrender 
 your interest without a fair equivalent. 
 
 What is to be the destiny of this territory, if it 
 is thus sold out, and what Its institutions.' It is 
 to become an integral part of New Mexico, and I 
 risk nothing in saying it will be dedicated to free 
 .soil. Its institutions will be anti-slavery. If the 
 character of the country was not to undergo a rad- 
 ical change in ihi.? respect, ©r if this change was 
 
\ 
 
 not confidently anticipated, we all know that the il 
 northern motive for makins; this purchase would l! 
 lose its existence. As the country now stands, it I 
 js protected by the annexation resolutions against '' 
 all congressional interference witli the question of 
 slavciy. Transfer it to New Mexico, and we ex- 
 pose il to ihc dangerous intermeddlins: which has 
 60 long unhappily afflicted that and all our territo- 
 rial popspssions. 
 
 This brinjis me to the only remaining proposi- 
 tion in Mr. Clay's compromise bill — that to estab- 
 lish territorial governments for New Mexico and j; 
 Utah, without the " Wilmot proviso." If this I 
 were an independent proposition, tendered in good 
 faith, and accepted by tlie North with a fixed pur- ! 
 pose to abide liy it, 1 have no hesitation in saying 
 it would receive my cordial support. 1 repeat ji 
 what 1 have often said, that whilst I shall resist ,' 
 the exclusion of slavery by congressional action, ; 
 I have no purpose or design to force or fasten it | 
 upon any countiy through the agency of Con- J 
 gress. Whilst 1 demand that Congress shall not 
 oppose our entrance into the territories with our ji 
 Blaves, I do not ask it to assist us in going there. ,i 
 All 1 ask is, that we may be treated as equals — ; 
 that no insulting discrimination shall be drawn ii 
 between southern and northern people — between 
 southern properly and northern properly. 
 
 How is this proposition regarded by the north- , 
 em men to whom it is tendered, and by whom it 
 may be accepted ? The spirit in which it is ac- 
 cepted is a jiart of the res gista; and I therefore 
 press the inquiry, in what light is the proposition j' 
 regarded ? — in what spirit will it be accepted, if it ' 
 is accepted at all, by northern men.' When 
 we shall have answered this inquiry, it will be I 
 seen whether there is leaven enough in this little 
 lump to leaven the whole loaf. 
 
 Mr. Webster is positive that we can never in- | 
 trodure slaves into the territory. "The laws of 
 God," he thinks, will forever forbid it. He, and 
 those who go with him, will not vote for the " pro- > 
 viso," because it is wuieccssary . They are op- 
 posed, uncompromisingly opposed, to the intro- ' 
 duclion of slaves into the territories; and they are 
 ready to do anything that may be found necessary 
 to keep them out. It is easy to see what they j 
 will do, if we commence introducing our slaves, i 
 They will at once say, " the laws of God" having 
 feiled us, we must try what virtue there is in 
 the " Wilmot proviso." Mr. Clay, and those 
 who follow him, are quite certain that " we are 
 already excluded by the laws of Mexico." They, i 
 too, are opposed to the introduction of slavery into 
 the territories, and stand ready to see it excluded. 
 The northern men who stand out against the com- i 
 promise, insist, and will continue to insist, on the 
 Wilmot proviso, as the only certain guarantee that 
 slavery will be permanently excluded. Ail, all 
 are opposed to our going in with our slaves, and 
 all are ready to employ whatever means may be 
 necessary to keep us out. I assert tliefact distinclly 
 und emphatically, that we are told every day that if 
 we attempt to introduce our slaves at any time 
 into New Mexico or Utah, there will be an im- 
 mediate ap[ilicaiion of the " Wilmot proviso," to 
 keep us out. Mark you, the proposition is to 
 give territorial governments to New Mexico and 
 Utah. Tliese are but congressional acts, and may 
 be altered, amended, explained, or repealed, at 
 pleasure. 
 
 No one here undersUtnde that we are entering 
 into a compact, and no northern man votds for this 
 compromise, with the expectation or understanding 
 that we are to take our slaves into the territories. 
 Whatever additional legi.'?lation may be found ne- 
 cessary hereafter to effect our perfect exclusion, 
 we are given distinctly to understand will be re- 
 sorted to. 
 
 But there is yet another difficulty to be over- 
 come, a more serious obstacle than either " the 
 laws of God," as Mr. Webster understands them, 
 or the Iaw3 of Mexico," as understood by Mr. 
 Clay. In regard to the first, I think Mr. Webster 
 is wholly mistaken, and if he is not, I am willing 
 to submit; and in regard to the second, I take 
 the ground, that when we conquered the Mexi- 
 can people, we conquered their laws. But Mr. 
 Clay's bill contains a provision as prohibitory as 
 the " proviso" itself. The territorial legislature 
 is denied the right to legislate at all in respect to 
 African slavery. If a master's slave absconds, 
 no law an be passed by which he may recover 
 him. 1 ■ he is maimed, he can have no damages 
 for the i; jury. If he is decoyed from his service, 
 or harbored by a vicious neighbor, he is without 
 remedy. A community of slaveholders may de- 
 sire to make lav.'s adapted to their peculiar wants 
 in this respect, but Congress, by this compromise 
 of Mr. Clay's, denies them the right to do so. 
 They shall not legislate in regard to African 
 slavery. What now becomes of the hypocritical 
 cant about the right of the people to regulate 
 their own affairs in their own way ? 
 
 With these facts before us, it becomes us to in- 
 quire how much we give and how much we take 
 in voting for Mr. Clay's bill. We admit Califor- 
 nia, and, being once in, the question is settled so 
 far as she is concerned. We can never get her 
 out by any process short of a dissolution of the 
 Union. We give up a part of pro-slavery Texas, 
 and we give it beyond redemption and forever. 
 i Our part of the bargain is binding. Our follies 
 ! may rise up and mock us in after times, but we 
 ' can never escape their effects. This much we 
 ' give; now what do we take .' We get a government 
 for New Mexico and Utah, without the Wilmot 
 proviso, but with a declaration that we are exclu- 
 ! ded already " by the laws ef God and the Mexican 
 \ nation,''^ or get it with a prohibition against terri- 
 I torial legislation on the subject of slavery, and with 
 a distinct threat constantly hanging over us that if 
 we attempt to introduce slaves against these pro- 
 < hibitions, the "Wilmot proviso" will be instantly 
 applied for our more effectual exclusion. 
 ' Such is the compromise. Such is the proposed 
 ' bargain. Can you, fellow-citizens, expect me to 
 i vote for it.' Will you demand of your Represent- 
 I ative to assist in binding you hand and foot, and 
 ' turning you over to the tender mercies of the Free- 
 Soilers ? 
 
 It is said, we can get nothing better than this. 
 
 But is that any sufficient reason why we should vote 
 
 for it ourselves .' If I am beset with robbers, who 
 
 i are resolved on assassination, must I needs lay vio- 
 
 IJ lent hands on myself.' or if my friend is in ex- 
 
 I tremes, must I strangle him .' We can get nothing 
 i better, forsooth ! In God's name can we get any- 
 thing worse? It is said that if we r^ject this, they 
 
 ': will paas the " Wilmot proviso." Let them pae« 
 ] it; it will not be more galling than this. If the 
 
 II proviso fails to challenge our respect, it at least 
 
 \ 
 
rises above our contempt. If it ever passes it will 
 be the act of the American Congress — of men 
 'earned in the law, and familiar with the abstruse 
 readings of the Coristitiuion. h will he. done de- 
 liberately, and after full reflectiou. It will not be 
 done by adventurers on the shores of the Pacific, 
 who seem to know but little of our Constitution or 
 laws, and to care less for our rights. 
 
 I have heard it said that it will be dangerous to 
 reject the application of California for admission 
 into the Union. Already she is threatening to set 
 up for herself, and if we reject her she will with- 
 draw her application and establish herself as an 
 independent Republic on the Pacific. Let her try 
 it.- We have been told that if the South refuse 
 to submit to the galling insults and outrageous 
 wrongs of the North, the President will call out 
 the naval and military power of the nation, and 
 reduce us to submission. When California asserts 
 her independence, and sets up her Republic on the 
 Pacific, we shall see h»w quick the President will 
 be to use this same military and naval force, in 
 bringing her back to her allegiance. These threats 
 bave no terrors for me. 
 
 As I could respect the reckless and bold robber 
 who, unmasked, presents his pistol and demands 
 cny money or my life, above the petty, but expert 
 pickpocket, who looks complaisantly in rny face 
 while he steals my purse, — so can I respect the 
 dashing, and dare-devil impudence of the Wilmot 
 proviso, which robs the South, and takes the re- 
 sponsibility, above the little, low, cunnine, slight- 
 of-hand scheme, which robs us just as effectually, 
 
 I and leaves ua wondering how the trick waa per- 
 formed. 
 
 So long as 1 remain in your service, fellow-citi- 
 zens, I will represent you faithfully, according to 
 my best judgment. In great emergencies like this, 
 I feel the need of your counsel and support. It 
 would give me pain, if any important vote of mine 
 should fail to meet your approbation. Whilst I 
 shall never follow blindly any man's lead, nor 
 suffer myself to be awed by any general outcry, 
 I confess myself not insensible to the applause of 
 my countrymen. In a great crisis like the present, 
 men must act, responsibility must be taken, and he 
 is not fit to be trusted who stops in the discharge 
 of his high duties to count his personal costs. 
 
 I cannot vote for Mr. Clay's compromise bill. 
 With very essential changes and modifications, I 
 might be reconciled to its support. These I have 
 no hope of obtaining, and I therefore expect to vote 
 against it. Like the fatal Missouri compromise, 
 it gives up everything and obtains nothing; and 
 liiic that and all other compromises with the North, 
 it will be observed, and its provisions maintained, 
 just so long as it suits the views of northern men 
 to observe and maintain them, and then they will 
 be unscrupulou.5ly abandoned. 
 
 it will give me great pleasure tu find myself 
 sustained by my constituents, in the votes I intend 
 to give. My head, my heart, my every thought 
 and impulse admonish me that I am right, and 1 
 cannot doubt or hesitate. 
 
 Your fellow-citizen, A. G. BROWN. 
 
 Washington City, May 13, 1850. 
 
 Printed at the Congressional Globe Office, 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 Hi mil mil mil II 
 
 011 932 923 i 
 
(^ 
 
 HOI 
 P