EXTENSION OF THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE LINE TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN: MR.
DAVIS, OF MISSISSIPPI, AND MR. CLAY: THE WILMOT PROVISO.
In the resolutions of compromise submitted by Mr. Clay there
was one declaring the non-existence of slavery in the territory
recently acquired from Mexico, and affirming the "inexpediency"
of any legislation from Congress on that subject within the said
territories. His resolution was in these words:
"_Resolved_, That as slavery does not exist by law, and is not
likely to be introduced into any of the territory acquired by
the United States from the Republic of Mexico, it is inexpedient
for Congress to provide by law either for its introduction into
or exclusion from any part of the said territory; and that
appropriate territorial governments ought to be established
by Congress in all of the said territory, not assigned as the
boundaries of the proposed State of California, without the
adoption of any restriction or condition on the subject of
slavery."
This proposition, with some half-dozen others, formed the system
of compromise with which Mr. Clay expected to pacify the slavery
agitation in the United States. Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, did not
perceive any thing of a compromise in a measure which gave nothing
to the South in the settlement of the question, and required the
extension of the Missouri compromise line to the Pacific ocean as
the least that he would be willing to take. Thus:
"But, sir, we are called on to receive this as a measure of
compromise! Is a measure in which we of the minority are to
receive nothing, a measure of compromise? I look upon it as but
a modest mode of taking that, the claim to which has been more
boldly asserted by others; and that I may be understood upon
this question, and that my position may go forth to the country
in the same columns that convey the sentiments of the senator
from Kentucky, I here assert that never will I take less than
the Missouri compromise line extended to the Pacific ocean, with
the specific recognition of the right to hold slaves in the
territory below that line; and that, before such territories are
admitted into the Union as States, slaves may be taken there
from any of the United States at the option of their owners."
This was a manly declaration in favor of extending slavery into the
new territories, and in the only way in which it could be done--that
is to say, by act of Congress. Mr. Clay met it by a declaration
equally manly, and in conformity to the principles of his whole
life, utterly refusing to plant slavery in any place where it did
not previously exist. He answered:
"I am extremely sorry to hear the senator from Mississippi
say that he requires, first, the extension of the Missouri
compromise line to the Pacific, and also that he is not
satisfied with that, but requires, if I understood him
correctly, a positive provision for the admission of slavery
south of that line. And now, sir, coming from a slave State, as
I do, I owe it to myself, I owe it to truth, I owe it to the
subject, to say that no earthly power could induce me to vote
for a specific measure for the introduction of slavery where
it had not before existed, either south or north of that line.
Coming as I do from a slave State, it is my solemn, deliberate
and well matured determination that no power, no earthly power,
shall compel me to vote for the positive introduction of slavery
either south or north of that line. Sir, while you reproach,
and justly too, our British ancestors for the introduction of
this institution upon the continent of America, I am, for one,
unwilling that the posterity of the present inhabitants of
California and of New Mexico shall reproach us for doing just
what we reproach Great Britain for doing to us. If the citizens
of those territories choose to establish slavery, and if they
come here with constitutions establishing slavery, I am for
admitting them with such provisions in their constitutions;
but then it will be their own work, and not ours, and their
posterity will have to reproach them, and not us, for forming
constitutions allowing the institution of slavery to exist among
them. These are my views, sir, and I choose to express them; and
I care not how extensively or universally they are known."
These were manly sentiments, courageously expressed, and taking
the right ground so much overlooked, or perverted by others. The
Missouri compromise line, extending to New Mexico and California,
though astronomically the same with that in Louisiana, was
politically directly the opposite. One went through a territory
all slave, and made one-half free; the other would go through
territory all free, and make one-half slave. Mr. Clay saw this
difference, and acted upon it, and declared his sentiments honestly
and boldly; and none but the ignorant or unjust could reproach him
with inconsistency in maintaining the line in the ancient Louisiana,
where the whole province came to us with slavery, and refusing it
in the new territories where all came to us free.
Mr. Seward, of New York, proposed the renewal of the Wilmot proviso:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than by
conviction for crime, shall ever be allowed in either of said
territories of Utah and New Mexico."
Upon the adoption of which the yeas and nays were:
"YEAS.--Messrs. Baldwin, Bradbury, Bright, Chase, Clarke,
Cooper, Corwin, Davis of Massachusetts, Dayton, Dodge of
Wisconsin, Douglas, Felch, Greene, Hale, Hamlin, Miller, Norris,
Seward, Shields, Smith, Upham, Whitcomb, and Walker--23.
"NAYS.--Messrs. Atchison, Badger, Bell, Benton, Berrien, Butler,
Cass, Clay, Clemens, Davis of Mississippi, Dawson, Dickinson,
Dodge of Iowa, Downs, Foote, Houston, Hunter, Jones, King,
Mangum, Mason, Morton, Pearce, Pratt, Rusk, Sebastian, Soulé,
Spruance, Sturgeon, Turney, Underwood, Webster, and Yulee--33."