tH2-5 
 
HOLUNGER 
 pH 8.5 
 
 MILL RUN F3-1543 
 
SPEECH 
 
 E 423 
 .P24 
 Copy 1 
 
 HON. RICHARD PARKER, OF VHIGINIA, 
 
 PRESIDENT'S MESS\GE IN RELATION TO CALIFORNIA. 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 JN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1850. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICI. 
 
 1850. 
 
u^^' 
 
CALIFORNIA-TIIE SLAVE UUESTION. 
 
 Tlie House being in Committee of tlie Whole on 
 the state of the Union, on the President's Mes- 
 sage communicating the Constitution of Cali- 
 fornia. 
 
 Mr. PARKER said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: When in December last we 
 assembled here from the different portions of the 
 Confederacy, there appeared amongst us a disposi- 
 tion to cultivate kind feelings with each other, and 
 to meet in a spirit of frankness the various que.<?- 
 tions of difference amongst us. And from all 1 
 then heard from northern gentlemen on this side 
 of the chauiber, I did not for a moment doubt that 
 an honest, and, I believed, a successful effort 
 would be made to accommodate, in a manner sat- 
 isfactory to all, the dissensions existing amongst 
 us in reference to the slavery question. 
 
 Diversity of opinion on this subject had for a 
 long time disturbed those amicable relations which 
 should prevail in a Confederacy of sovereign Stales, 
 and was threatening the very existeoce of that 
 Confederacy, and it was hoped — I may say the 
 country expected — that all her representatives 
 would unite in one energetic effort to restore har- 
 mony to our Federal councils, and by removing 
 the causes for disquiet and apprehension, to place 
 upon a yet more stable foundation the destinies of 
 this glorious republic. To effect this great and 
 hallowed work, it had the right to expect that we 
 should meet in this hall, as the representatives of 
 independent vet united States should meet, with 
 feelings of patriotism in our breasts, with a love 
 of country which would enable us to bear with 
 much for its welfare, with a sincere purpose to 
 deliberate calmly upon the troubles and the dan- 
 gers which surround us — in a word, in a spirit of 
 conciliation, as men resolved to firactice towards 
 each other and towards all portions of the Con- 
 federacy, that courtesy of demeanor and charity 
 of feeling so necessary for the advancement of the 
 public weal. 
 
 Meeting in such a spirit, and acting in accord- 
 ance with Its demands, we might have drawn still 
 more closiRly together the bonds which unite us; 
 we might have hoped that success would crown 
 our efforts, and that we might have settled, once 
 and forever, the only subject that could possibly 
 dissever the Union. 
 
 But, 1 regret to say it, these good feelings seem 
 to have been displaced by feelmgs of a very dif- 
 ferent character. And northern men and south- 
 ern men, in appearance, have occupied towards 
 
 each other on this floor rather the attitude of the 
 repn-aentatives of hostile nations than that of 
 members of the same legislative council. 
 
 That we from the South should speak warmly, 
 whenever any atlem[)t was made to restrict or en- 
 croach upon our rights, in a matter of such vital 
 concern to us, was natural — was to be expected. 
 In truth, we should be false to our constituents, 
 false to the feelinijs they entertain upon the subject 
 of these attacks upon our guarantied riichts, if we 
 did not speak in the language of firmness and d'- 
 lermination. We at the South do believe that, for 
 thfi last thirty years, you of the North, from feeluigs 
 of a blind, but not the less hurtful philanthropy, 
 with some; from an anxiety for political power with 
 others; and with others still, from more improper 
 motives, have violated, to our injury and oppres- 
 sion, the most sacred guarantees of the Constitu- 
 tion, and have assumed to this Government power^s 
 which never were granted to it, and never would 
 have been granted by that portion of the Confed- 
 eracy from which we come. It is our duty, then, 
 to warn you — not in tones of anger or defiance, 
 yet in the language of a fixed resolution- -that the 
 course you arc pursuing may involve both you 
 and us in one common calamity. Now, gentle- 
 men from the North choose to consider the lan- 
 guage of warning as the language of defiance, and 
 permit themselves to be excited beyond measure, 
 and, I must say, often to the perversion of our 
 real meaning into something intentionally offen- 
 sive to themselves. Thus, when my colleague 
 from the Richmond district, some time since called 
 upon the President, in the name of the Slate 
 which had given him birth — of the State which 
 had adopted him as her son — and of the State 
 where he had fixed his home,*and where his friends 
 and neighbors lived — that he, at least, should not 
 l)e found using the influence of his high |)osition 
 to fasten upon the South terms injurious to her 
 interests and degrading to her honor; and, to 
 make his appeal still moie effective, reminded the 
 President, that on that batile-field which has cov- 
 ered him with glory, and has raised him to the 
 highest office kno^'n to our lav/s, he was sus- 
 tained by men from all portions of the Union — 
 from the South as well as from the North —by the 
 brave Mississippians, as well as by the gallant 
 Indianians — genilemen have chosen, not willfully, 
 but under ihe influence of excitement, to pervert 
 tlie sole and only object of my colleague into one 
 of vaingloryingoii his |>art of the prowess nf south- 
 ern troops, when contrasted with troops from 
 
other portions of the Confederacy. And under 
 this impression the honorable gentleman from Illi- 
 nois [Mr. Bissell] indulged in a strnin of re- 
 mark bv no meins ca!cult\ted to restore harmony 
 to this House — a strain of rem.nrk which grated 
 harshly on every southern ear. Himself a gallant 
 soldier, he has not been rontent to claim for those 
 who on that great day fought under his immediate 
 command, the tribute of praise to which they are 
 justly entitled, and which the whole country has 
 'ong since awarded ; but to judge him by hi.s 
 speech, and the manner in wiiich it was delivered, 
 he has virtually denied that the Mississippi regi- 
 ment was entitled to any praise for its bearing und 
 •ervices in that battle. 
 
 Mr. BISSELL. I expressly disaffirm all inten- 
 tion, in the remarks I submitted to ihi.s committee 
 on a former occa.sion, of casting any imputation 
 on the Mississippi regiment. I could not have 
 been so unjust to that regiment, or to myself. My 
 object solely was to remove an erroneous impres- 
 sion which had been created, as 1 thought, unin- 
 tentionally, of course, l)y the remarks of the gen- 
 tleman from Virginia, [Mr. Seddon,] in reference 
 to certain incidents of the battle of Buena Vista. 
 I take pleasure in saying now, as I have always 
 saio, that the Mississippi rejjiment bore itself as 
 gallantly on that field asany other rejjiment there. 
 
 Mr. PARKER resumed and said, I understood 
 the honora!)le gentleman as he now explains him- 
 Bclf. I was confident it was not his intention to 
 deny those services. They were too well known to 
 induce me to tliink for an instant that he was deny- 
 ing thf m. But still, under the excitement of the 
 moment, he did not mention thein; and if it should 
 chance that the honorable gentleman's speech, as 
 delivered here, should be the only record of the 
 •onflict at Buena Vista that should descend to fu- 
 ture times, it might appear that a southern regi- 
 ment had claimed the greatest honors of the day, 
 when, in truth, it was not even engaged in the 
 fight; for all that he said of that regiment Ls, that 
 it was a mile and a half distant from the field. 
 Now, v/ill the honorable gentleman wonder that 
 southern msn manifest occasional excitement, 
 when questions of the most vital concern to their 
 constituents are agitated here from day to day, 
 when so unfounded a suspicion of wrong to him 
 •nd others, being inrended where none was thought 
 of, caused him to for;iet what was due io gallant 
 •outhern men who, with him, bore the toils and 
 the danger.'-- of the fight.' 
 
 But again, the honorable gentleman has thought 
 proper to sneer at the bravery of the southern 
 people. He has told us, you are biave men, I 
 admi ;aye ! as biaveasyour fnther.s — not braver — 
 who permitted a Bmull, ill-equip|)ed, enervated 
 body of British troops, not 4,500 in nuinl er, to 
 inarch to tlie se.nt of Government, burn its Capi- 
 tol, destroy its archives, and this almost without 
 a blow. Did the honorable gentleman say this by 
 way of taunt? And is it his settled purfiose to 
 arome a fteling in this House, which must neces- 
 sarily prerliide even the hope of arranging that 
 Irouble.souic question, which presses so heavily 
 ■pon U8? If so, 1 think he mistakes his duty as 
 ■ reftresentative, whose leading wish should ever 
 be to pronidie, in every proper way, and on all 
 ■Hitalde orcHKions, the [)urpo3es for which, as the 
 Constitution iisell declares, this Government was 
 formed; 1 mean "in order to cruate a tnoie per- 
 
 fect union, establish justice, and insure domestic 
 f] Iranquiltily." These objects, surely, are not ad- 
 vanced by the course which the honorable gentle- 
 man from Illinois is pursuing. 
 
 And then, again, tne honorable gentleman has 
 informed the House and the country, that Illinois, 
 which furnished nine regiments for the Mexican 
 war, will furnish thirty-six regiments to suppress 
 I' and put down all tumultuous or revolutionary 
 I movements in the South. Why really, sir, I might 
 I retaliate on the honorable gentleman, and say of 
 {l him, what he said of sou'hern men, that he, too, 
 y at times indulges in a little gasconade; but I will 
 not do so, my object being peace and harmony. I 
 will, however, advise the honorable gentleman to 
 reflect more carefully upon the nature of the gov- 
 ernments under which we live, and of the relations 
 of the States of this Union towards each other 
 and towards this Federal Government, before he 
 asain threatens to interfere, by armed force, with 
 the action of independent sovereign States. Such 
 studies may be more useful than his enumeration 
 of the cohorts the North will throw upon us, in 
 the event, that by your own folly and injustice, 
 you drive us to seek for happiness apart from all 
 connection with you. Now, sir, I will again say 
 that a discussion, conducted in this temper, and with 
 such allusions, is much to be deprecated. The 
 pulilic interests cannot be advanced by it, but, on 
 the contrary, must sulfer from every manifestation 
 of bad feeling in this hall; and I therefore hope 
 that we will, each of us, restrict ourselves to a 
 fair, full, and free examination of the various ques- 
 tions of complaint now before us for considera- 
 tion. It is in this spirit I engage in an inve.sli- 
 gation of these several questions; but before doing 
 so, I would assure the honorable gentleman from 
 Illinois, that in what I have said of the course of 
 remark adopted by him the other day, it is very 
 far from my intention to wound his sensibilities, 
 or to detract in any way from the enviable posi- 
 j lion he has won for himself by his gallant bearing 
 
 in our war with Mexico. 
 ' 1 have said that, for years past, we at the South 
 have had many and good causes of complaint for 
 injuries inflicted by the North. 
 
 Before, however, entering upon the considera- 
 tion of these topics, permit me to allude to some 
 of the many unfounded complaints which, since 
 the commencement of this session, northern repre- 
 sentatives have made against us of the South. 
 
 In the first place, it is asserted that in all our 
 former acquisitions of territory — of Louisiana, of 
 Florida, and of Texas — the South has been influ- 
 enced by the most selfish motives, and has insisted 
 on these additions because they would be to its 
 peculiar advantage; and that in each of these in- 
 .stances we have been guilty of aggi-essions upon 
 the North, Now, sir, Louisiana was purchased 
 to secure to the whole country, and es|iecially to 
 the great Northwest, the full and complete con- 
 y trol of the Mississippi river. This was the ncces- 
 H sity for its purchase-^ necessity not originating 
 in any intention to aggranitize the power of the 
 South. And so again with Florida. The inter- 
 ests of the whole country required the extinction 
 of the title of S[>Hin, whose authority over that 
 country was so slight, that she had abandoned it 
 almost emirely to bands of savages, who. led on 
 by unprincipled adventurers, weie giving constant 
 annoyance and doing serious injury to the Union 
 
5 
 
 in many of its most essential interests. Btaides, 
 we gave for Florida other southern territory, more 
 important to Spain berausc more convenient to 
 her other possessions on this continent-, and thus 
 by its acquisition we did not in any degree add to 
 the extent of southern territory. And when it 
 was propo.sed to annex Texas to our Union — 
 Texas, which once was part of that Union — did 
 not the North as well as the S.Hiih epeait out 
 bohlly in her behalf, and demand her annexation 
 on grounds of high Slate policy ? Our soundest 
 statesmen regarded her annexation as essential to 
 the peace and welfare and power of the Union. 
 Foreign r)ations took the same view, and England 
 and France exhausted all the art.s of diplomacy to 
 prevent this great result. And gentlemen from the 
 North are now doin? injustice to their own patri- 
 otic efforts in J844, when they cite the annexation 
 of Texas as en evidence of southern aggression, 
 and say that it was eft'i-cied against the convictions 
 and the wishes of the North. In fact it was neither 
 North nor South that has made these extensions 
 of our empire. They are the gloVious fruits of 
 that republican policy which has no sectional 
 views, and which has ever looked, and I trust ever 
 will look, to the welfare of the Union, and the 
 wiioie Union. 
 
 And this same enlarged and catholic spirit, which 
 in 1844 induced the norihern Democracy to extend 
 the area of our Union by embracing within it the 
 State of Texas, has ever been reciprocated by the 
 South. 
 
 In the Revolution, (he South sent her sons to 
 perish on northern fields, in defence of northern 
 soil. Yes ! in that struggle North and South stood 
 shoulder to shoulder by each other. The war of 
 1812 was waged for righis peculiarly dear to the 
 commercial Stales of the Noith. It was waged 
 for " free trade and sailors' righis" — righis in 
 which the South fell no peculiar concern, but 
 which she maintained with as much spirit as if 
 her own dearest interests were involved. So we 
 of the South stood by you in your controversy 
 respecting your northeastern boundary; and still 
 laier, though threatened with the power of Eng- 
 land, when the time had come for asserting your 
 claim to the far northern territory of Oregon. 
 
 But an honorable gentleman frojn Ohio [Mr. 
 Campbell] complained that the South had re- 
 pealed the tariff acts of 1828 and 1842, and spoke of 
 these acts of repeal as agp-essirms upon the North, 
 and u|)on northern ca[)ital. This d scovery is en- 
 tirely due 10 thatgenileman, and 1 feel confident no 
 one will contest with him the merit of having made 
 it. Why, sir, those acts had proved of the greatest 
 injury to every interest in the country, cxcepimK 
 the manufacturing interest only. Our selfish pol- 
 icy, as developed in them, had closed against us 
 the markets of the world, and left the lich and 
 varied productions of the earth to waste upon our 
 hands, and our shipping to rot, for want of em- 
 ployment, at their wharves. Their repeal has 
 given a new impul.se to ea(;h of these emfdoy- 
 menis; and, under the genial influence of our 
 present tariff act, the husbandman is sure to re- 
 ceive that reward which is due to his industry, 
 and our commerce, unshackled, once more whitens 
 every ocean, bearing i>pon its bosom the produc- 
 tions of every clime, and free to CDtitribute to the 
 comfort and relief of man wherever he is to be 
 found. And yet the honorable gentleman speaks 
 
 of laws llial h«ve proved thus beneficial, as ag- 
 gresiioiu upon the North. 
 
 I now leave the consideration of chnrge;* such 
 as these, and will briefly examine the ju'iiice of 
 those compl. tints which the entire South utters 
 against the North. 
 
 And, in the first place, gentlemen of the North, 
 permit me to direct your attention to a subject of 
 complaint, about which the [)e<)ple 1 repre^ent feel 
 the greatest anxiety and concern — I mean the con- 
 duct of your people, of your judges, and your 
 legislatures with respect to the reatoration of fugi- 
 tives from labor. 
 
 It is well knoWn that the Articles of Confeder- 
 ation cnniained no provision for the reslonition of 
 such of our slaves as mi^hl flee from one Slate to 
 anoiher. And prior to the adoption of our Con- 
 stitution, ihe want of such a iirovision subjected 
 those States most interested in slavery to great in- 
 convenience, annoyance, and loss. We also know 
 that this entire subject was carefully considered in 
 the Convention which framed the Constitution; 
 and we further know that the Constitution would 
 never have been adopted, had it not contained that 
 full and complete provision f<)r the protection of 
 our slave propeity which we find in it. That pro- 
 vision is, that " no person held to service «r labor 
 in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into 
 another, shall, in consequence of any law or regu- 
 lation therein, be discharged from such service or 
 labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the 
 party to whom such service or Ial>or m:iy lie due." 
 The object of this provision of the Constitution 
 is too plain t > be misunderstood, it was intended 
 to secure to the owner of a fugitive slave the .same 
 right to recapture his slave in the Stiite tr) which 
 he had escaped or fled, that he hod in the tate 
 from which he escaped. And any law or regula- 
 tion of any Slate, which in any way interrupts, 
 limits, delays, .or postpones this right, is a vioLiiion 
 of this Constitutional guarantee; and any conduct 
 on the part of the citizens of any State, which has 
 such an effect, is rejirehensible in the extreme, is 
 a violation of the supreme law of the land, and 
 should be punished in the most exemplary manner. 
 Such is thecouipact, the solemn stipulation, which 
 you made with us. And I now ask, how has it 
 been kept on your pari? Yes, although the mem- 
 bers of your several Slate Legislatures, and all 
 your Executive and Judicial officers, have each of 
 them sworn to support this Constitution, and, by 
 taking that oath, have sworn to abide by this com- 
 pact, and to maintain it in full force, how has it 
 been kept ? For many years it was construed by 
 your peojile according to its true intention and de- 
 sign; and a slave escaping into a non-slaveholding 
 Stale could be pursued, and, in general, as (asily 
 at)prehended there a's in the Siaie from which he 
 fled. But for many years past its obbsaiion has 
 l)een almost entirely disregarded; and in some of 
 the States every obstacle is thrown UJ the way of 
 the owner who goes into such States to avail him- 
 .«elf of a ritcht secured to him by the Constitution. 
 Your people interpose every difficulty in our way, 
 they cast every insult upon us, and, whenever it 
 is necessary to insure the escape of the slave, they 
 do not hesitate lo resort to any degree of violence 
 — a violence .<f)metime3 amounting to murder, 
 as in the case of Kennedy, of Maryland. So great, 
 indeed, is the violence to which we are subjected, 
 that I know that no one from my own disiricl 
 
6 
 
 thinks of pursuing his slave into Pennsylvania — ] 
 ihui bein^ ihe State in which the runaway slaves [ 
 from nriy [><irtinn of Virsinia are harbored and con- 
 cealed — unless he o;oes armed, prepared to sell his 
 life as dearly as he may, and always in apprehen- 
 sion lest death may be the conseqoence of his 
 eflTort to recover a property, which is his by the 
 laws of his own State; his by this provision of the 
 Federal Constitution. Do you say that you can- • 
 not suard against these acts of violence — that they 
 are sudden — the acts of mobs you cannot control? 
 In reply, ! say your law invites this violence and j 
 these mobs. For if, in the attempt to recover his j 
 slave, "any tumult" ari.ses, the owner is made re- 
 sponsible for it ; and a tumult is therefore always ! 
 resorted to — it beins the very mode for an escape 
 pointed out by your laws. A§:ain, your law makes | 
 It hiffhiy penal in any officer or citizen in any way j 
 to aid the ( laiinani in the recovery of his property. I 
 You further deny to him the privilege of securinj^ j 
 his properly in any " building belonging to the 
 State, or to any town, city, or person therein."! 
 And you punish, by heavy fine or long imnrison- 
 men', any mauistratc who dares to comply with 
 the duties assigned him by the Act of Congress of 
 1793. 
 
 And now, can the North, which has derived so 
 mnoh benefit, and has grown so great under this 
 Federal Constitution, feel surprised that we call } 
 upon her, by the faith she pledged to us in that | 
 sacred instrument, and by the obligations she j 
 thereby assumed, to stand by this provision made i 
 for our benefit.' Or can she he surprised that her 
 neglect of the high obligations under which she ^ 
 brought herself by acceptins; this Con.stitution, 
 has given rise to disappointment and to much 
 angry feeling on our part? Is she to receive all ] 
 the advantages of union, and yet not be held j 
 bound by this most .<;olemn stipulation — a stipu- j 
 lation so distinct, that no pretext -can cover its |j 
 eva.=iion ? 1; 
 
 I ask, then, not by way of favor, but as a mat { 
 ler of right, that our northern States do award to : 
 us, in spite of all real or assumed jirejudice j 
 against us and our institutions, precisely that |i 
 measure of justice which the Constitution in- ! 
 tendrd. Let them, in this matter, act up to its I; 
 true intent and meaning. We a.'^k nothing more. I 
 
 Su<-h has been our devotion to the Union, that i 
 we have borne, with a patience that surprises our- |; 
 selves when we think of it, the many serious 
 evils inflicteil upon us by your studied denial of Jj 
 this our constitutional right. And such is still jj 
 our desire to maintain the Union, that we are |[ 
 even now willing to forget and to forgive the jiast, ! 
 in cnnsideratinn of justice hereafter. || 
 
 But there is another question as important to jj 
 us of the South as that I have just discussed, ' 
 scarcely less injurious to her present interests, j 
 and, if poHsible, far more alarming a<» to its fu- 
 ture effec's upon our welfare; and that is, your j| 
 a.'auming the right to this Government to exclude ]'. 
 slavery frotn the Territories of the United States. !| 
 These Territories are the common property of Ij 
 the State*', acquired by the joint blood and treas- ' 
 ure of all, thniiigh the agency of this Govern- ' 
 inetit. Being thus acquired, they are the [irop- j 
 «riy of (Hch of the Simes, and of all. They are j| 
 the (iropr rty of Virginia, as much as of New .. 
 York or MatMachiisniH, nnd are only the prop- 
 erly of the UtJitcd States, because the propeityof ' 
 
 Virginia and of each of her sister States. And 
 yet, by your clamorous threats to exclude sla- 
 very from them by law of Congress, you have 
 virtually appropriated them to yourselves, to the 
 detriment of all the southern Stales and their in- 
 habitants. Is this the treatment which we de- 
 serve from you, our partners in this Confederacy ?^ 
 Is not this a discrimination against the South, as 
 insulting to her honor as it is injurious to her in- 
 terests? Is it that just division to which equals 
 are entitled ? Is it wise or politic thus to exclude 
 us from all participation in the fruits of our joint 
 efforts ? And does not such a course hold out to 
 the States thus placed under the ban, the strongest 
 possible motive to withhold from the Federal 
 head all assistance in future wars, the po sible 
 result of which may be the acquisition of terri- 
 tory > 
 
 But let us leave these general, yet unanswerable, 
 appeals to justice and right, and examine whether 
 you have the power tiius to legislate. The [lowers 
 granted to this Federal Government are few in 
 number, and limited in extent: and all powers not 
 delegated to the United States by the Constitution, 
 are reserved t.) the Slates respectively, or to the 
 people. And whenever "a question arises concern- 
 ' ing the constitutionality of a particular power, the 
 ' first question is, whether the power be expressed 
 ' in the Constitution. If it be, the question is de- 
 ' cided. If it Ite not expressed, the next inquiry 
 ' must be, whether it is properly an incident to an 
 ' ex|)ress power, and necessary to its execution. If 
 ' it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be 
 ' not, Congress cannot exercise it." 'This is the 
 test given us by Mr. Madison, in his well kmwn 
 report of 1799-180 ), by which to try the validity 
 of all doubtful powers claimed for this Govern- 
 ment; and I have quoted its precise langunge, be- 
 cause, as authority, it is as much respected, I be- 
 lieve, by Democrats of the North as by those in 
 the South. I therefore invoke my political breth- 
 ren from that portion of our country to apply this 
 test, as given us by Mr. Madison, to the power to 
 exclude slavery from the Territories by law of 
 Congress; and I entreat them not to permit this 
 question of slavery to be used as a device to draw 
 them into constructions of the Federal Constitu- 
 tion, which hereafter may prove fatal to all their 
 reserved rights. It is wise from time to time to 
 look back to the old l.-mdmarks, to determine how 
 far we may have deviated from thnt boundary line 
 which sejiarates the powers of this Government 
 from those of our respective Slates. All the ten- 
 dencies of the times point to consolidation — an 
 evil as much to be apjirehended by the friei:ds of 
 human liberty as the iJisruption of our Union into 
 many fragments. 
 
 The only clause of the Constitution under which 
 this power is claimed as ?j7)i-f.<.<;/i/ granted, is that 
 which declares that " the Congress shall have 
 power to dispose of, and make all needful rules 
 and regulations respecting, the territory or other 
 property belonging to the United States." Now, I 
 tliink it clear that no power to govern the Terri- 
 tories is conferred by this clause of the Constitu- 
 tion, but simply the power to manage and dispose 
 of them as property. It refers to the territory as 
 property, and as jaoperty only. The power is 
 to dixiiose of — an expnssion ajiplicable to pioperty 
 alone. And then that which may be dispoNed of 
 must beluitg to the United States — !angua;^e alto- 
 
gether appropriate to territory an properly, butun- 11 
 intelligible when wpplied to territory in any other I 
 sense. And " the ruica and regulations" which, [ 
 under this clause of the Constilulion, Congresa | 
 may enact respeclintr the territory, are simply the ! 
 rules and regulations which it niay enforce as to , 
 all other property of the United Stales. 
 
 And again, if (he cxprtssion "rules and regu- 
 lations" carries with it the exclusive power of 
 making laws, as is contended, what was the ne- 
 cessity forgiving Congresj), in another clause of the ' 
 Constitution, the exclusive power of legislation | 
 over such places as might be purchased by Con- j 
 gress for the erection of forts, magazines, ar.scnals 
 and other needful buildings? For these places when | 
 purchased, become jjroperty belonj;ing to the 
 United Stales, respecting which Congress may, 
 by authority of the clause we are considering, 
 make all " needful rules and regulations;" and if 
 these "rules and regulations" include the power 
 of legislation, why do so unnecessary a thing as 
 to grant in express terms the power of legislation 
 over them ? 
 
 But it is said that in several cases the Supreme 
 Court has decided that Congress has tliis power 
 of legislation over the Territories, by virtue of this | 
 very grant of power to make all " needful rules j 
 and regulations." 1 should like to comment upon j 
 these cases, but my time will not permit me. I I 
 can only say, that I believe there is no case in 
 whicli that tribunal has decided that Congress de- 
 rives its legislative power over the Territories from 
 any express grant in the Constitution. 
 
 I think, therefore, I may assert that no such 
 power of legislation is expressed in the Constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Is this power, then, properly an incident to any 
 express power, and necessary to its execution ? 
 The only clauses of the Constitution under which, 
 in this view, this power is claimed, are those which 
 authorize Congress to "declare war," and to 
 •' make treaties." Each of these powers includes, 
 and in their exercise will lead, as they have here- 
 tofore led, to the acquiring of territory. And this 
 territory, when acquired, must be governed, and 
 governed by Congress, that being the agent that 
 acquired it for the States, and which must govern 
 • it for the States. And it is in this way only that 
 Congress obtains its right to legislate for the Ter- 
 ritories. But this power of legislation being im- 
 pliedly vested in Congress only because necessary 
 for the preservation of thai which is acquired, is 
 clearly limited to such legislation as is necessary 
 for that purpose. And It would be a flagrant de- 
 parture from the rule of construction laid down by 
 Mr. Miulison, to extend this implied power beyniul 
 what is " necessary and proper" for the protection 
 of the territory. And as I take it for granted that 
 no one will contend that the exclusion of slavery 
 from the Territories of the United Stales is neces- j 
 sary for their preservation and protection, I draw 
 the conclusion that the right to exclude it is not 
 within the scope of the powers of Congress, and j 
 that any law enacted by Congress for its exclusion 
 would he unconstitutional and void. 
 
 It is said, however, that we must follow the pre- 
 cedent set us by the ordinance of 1787. We must 
 do nothing of the kind, if satisfied that the power 
 is not sranted to Congress by the Constitution. 
 This would be to violate the Constitution which J 
 we have sworn to support. But how can that i 
 
 ordinance, enacted as it was prior lo the adoption 
 of our Conaiiiulion, be used as u [)recedeni by 
 which lo interpret that Constitution? 
 
 One argument that has frequently been used in 
 support of the ordinance of 1787, is, that aa Vir- 
 ginia, before the ces.sion, had the right lo exclude 
 slavery from the north we.stern Territory, this right 
 was f)roperly exercised by the old CongrcM.s; it, by 
 the ces.-^ion, having been invested with all the rights 
 and powers which before belonged to Virginia. I 
 must confess I never felt the fon e of this reason- 
 ing: fir.st, because 1 doubt the right of an ordinary 
 Legislature to declare that not lo be property which 
 before was |;roperty; and secondly, because no 
 such power was conferred by the States upon the 
 Confederation, and it could only exercise such 
 powers as were granted to it. 1 therefore regard 
 the ordinance of 17d7 as an act of usurpation — a 
 beacon to warn, not a light to be followed. But 
 this is immaterial — for when the clause excluding 
 slavery was first proposed, it did not receive the 
 vote of a single southern State. Nor did this ex- 
 clusion prevail until several years afterwards, when 
 it was coupled with the power to reclaim fugitive 
 slaves. And (to adopt a suggestion made some 
 years since by a very distinguished Senator from 
 South Carolina, whose present serious indisposi- 
 tion is sincerely regretted, I am sure, by every 
 memlier of this House) to obtain its passage, ad- 
 vantage was taken of the inconvenience to which the 
 South was subjected for want of such a provision; 
 and it is scarcely fair to bring forward, as worthy 
 of imitation, an enactment which had its origin in 
 such a source. 
 
 And then again, it is said that, by the Mi.ssouri 
 compromise, (most improperly so called,) the South 
 is estopped from raising this objection. But, in 
 reply, it should be remembered that that law was 
 forced upon us by northern votes, and its enact- 
 ment can no more prove the constitutional power 
 of Congress to exclude slavery from the Terri- 
 tories, than the law to establish a United States 
 bank determines the constitutionality of a bank. 
 But the South has submitted to that comproinise ! 
 It has, and it is yet willing to extend the line of 
 separation to the Pacific. Having been over- 
 powered in the struggle which preceded its adop- 
 tion, it is still willing to yield to the principles 
 then determined on for the division of the Territo- 
 ries, in place of again engaging in a strife, in 
 which it would most probably be again defeated. 
 
 Whilst on this subject, I will very briefly allude 
 to a view which I have often heard presented by 
 those who claim absolute power for Congress over 
 the subject of slavery in the Territories; and that 
 is, that the acquisition of territory was not within 
 ' the contemplation of the framers of the Consiitu- 
 I lion, and that therefore the powers of Congress 
 j over acquired Territories are not restricted by the 
 ; Constitution. If the fact here asserted were true, 
 I (which I by no means admit, for 1 auinot believe 
 j that the statesmen of that day did not foresee the 
 necessity of at least so much additional territory 
 1 as would secure to us the command of the Missis- 
 sippi river,) it would by no means establish the 
 proposition contended for. It would leave us no 
 other alternative than to make such a dis[iosition 
 of the territory as would be fair and just between 
 the diirerent Slates whose common treasure had 
 purchased it, or such as the parlies to the Consti- 
 tution would themselves most probably have made, 
 
8 
 
 had this subject been then brought under their 
 coiis deration. 
 
 Fur these various rrnsons I think I have some 
 ground fir saying that the North has not made 
 out its ronstiiutional ri;^ht to enact the laws with 
 whic'^ they threaten us, and that I am justified in 
 the dcclanilion that their continued efforts to pass 
 such laws have been, in spirit and in fact, aggi-es- 
 sivt upon the rights of the southern Slates. 
 
 But the opinion has been frequently expressed 
 on this floor, and secins to be a very general one 
 in por'inns of the country, that as to the Territo- 
 ries wliii'h we have acquired from Mexico by our 
 late ircaiy of pence and boundaries wiih her, (and 
 it is a.<! to these Territories only that this power in 
 Congress over the subject of slavery has any prac- 
 tical bearing at this time,) the old Mexican laws 
 abolishing slavery still prevail there, and prohibit 
 its existetire; that therefore theSouih ought to y itid 
 to the insertion of a clause prohibiting slavery into 
 all bills for the government of these territories, 
 because by so doing it in fact yield.s nothing. 
 
 But if this opinion be sound, which I by no 
 means assent to, why should the North insist upon 
 such a provision, and insist so strenuously as to 
 defeat every territorial bill which does not con- 
 tain such a provision ? Is it merely to obtain a 
 victory over the States of the South ? Or is it for 
 the purpose of establishing another precedent by 
 which to bind us on some future day? Or is it 
 because it has no confidence in the opinion it so 
 boldly advances? One thing is certain, that slavery 
 is either excluded from these Territories by this 
 Mexican or local lav/, or it is not. If it is so ex- 
 cluded, there is no necessity to exclude it by act of 
 Congre.«s. If it is not so excluded, such an act 
 would be unjust, as it would virtually deny to one 
 portion of the Confederacy a riuht which it would 
 confer upon another — the right to enter upon, and 
 possess, and cultivate the public lands in those 
 Territories. 
 
 And what, sir, was the spectacle presented to 
 the nation but the other day, when an attempt 
 was made to force through this House, without 
 debate, a resolution instructing one of our com- 
 mittees to report a bill for ihe admission of Cali- 
 fornia as a State into this Union, and expressly 
 prohibiting that committee from connecting with 
 that subject any regulations or piovisions respect- 
 ing our other Territories ! Yes, sir, although 
 California claims to come into this Union with 
 boundaries very objectionable — her sea-coast ex- 
 tending over nine hundred miles, reaching as far 
 as from Boston to Savannah — yet under this reso- 
 lution we were not to be allowed the privilege of 
 discussing the propriety of admitting her with 
 such disproportioned limits ; — we were not to 
 consider whether this would be just or unjust to 
 those of our citizens who occupy otirer portions 
 of that western territory. And alihoujh we 
 liavc good reasons for suspecting that the Execu- 
 tive has, in connection with this California cnnati- 
 tiitioti, been guilty of usurpation, and has arro- 
 gated to himself powers which belong to Congress 
 alone, the re[)re3ciitaiiveB of the people were to be 
 prohibited from freely canva«sing his conduct, and 
 
 deciding what measures the public safety de- 
 manded to protect our constituents from a repe- 
 tition of such unlav/ful attempts. The admission 
 of California, the great measure of the session, 
 was to be forced through by a denial of the dear- 
 est right of this body, the right of free discussion 
 upon public men and public measures; atid the 
 representatives of the people, under the operation 
 of a gag, were to be degraded into mere machines 
 to register the will of an arbitrary, unreasoning 
 majority. But, sir, the prohibitory clause of that 
 resolution explains everything. It shows that 
 there are factionists here unwilling to discuss pub- 
 lic measures, and fully as unwilling to enter upon 
 an attem)>t to settle the various matters of diffi- 
 culty and dispute which divide us sectionally, 
 producing alarm and uneasiness throughout the 
 country, and causing many a patriot to fear that 
 the sacrifices we made for liberty and for union in 
 years that have passed, were made in vain. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I had intended to make some 
 comment upon the great revolution in the public 
 sentiment of the North upon this slavery question, 
 which the last few years have brought about. 1 
 had intended to have brought to your notice the 
 public acts and writings of Van Buren, of Wright, 
 Puuldinir,and others, and to have asked why this 
 entire change of opinion. But 1 fear, sir, that I 
 am fatiiruing both you and the committee. 
 
 Some twelve or fourteen years ago we had in 
 the North many gallant supporters and defenders 
 of our rights. From all that I can learn, they have 
 one by one deserted us, until now those still true 
 to us, and (I say it intending no disrespect to any 
 one) still true to the principles of llie Constitution, 
 by the very strangeness of their attitude more 
 strongly mark the almost universal defection. 
 Whilst we regret the desertion of those who once 
 occupied so lar^e a space in our regards, let us, 
 "with hooks of steel," grapple to us the few yet 
 left. Amongst these I am sure I may include a 
 distinguished Senator from Michigan, [Mr. C.\as,J 
 and a no less distinguished Senator from New 
 York, [Mr. Dickinson,] and I trust, that before 
 this session closes, many northern representatives 
 in this chamber will, for the sake of peace and to 
 preserve the Union, range themselves with us un- 
 der the only banner beneath which confederated 
 rc|niblics can safely form, the banner of Ecputl'Uy of 
 rights, and of .Ibslinence from the exercise of all doubt- 
 ful potters. 
 
 News of the most cheering kind has already 
 reached us from the North. And let the tempest 
 rage here as loud as it may, I sliall hope on to the 
 last that that devotion to the Union, which we are 
 told is so wide-spread a feeling at tlie North, will 
 lead to more moderate measures here, and be the 
 means of saving the Union. 
 
 But should 1 be disappointed in this hope — 
 should aggression be accumulated upon aggression, 
 and wrong upon wron^— it is not for me'to predict 
 what line of conduct Virginia will pursue. That 
 is not within the province of any of her represent- 
 atives here. That she will determine for herself 
 in convention of her people; and that determina- 
 tion once made will be binding upon all her sons. 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
\^ 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF CONGRESS 
 
 011932 9310 ♦ ,^