| OCR Text |
Show 368 THE AGITATION IN 1847 - GO. to verify until the whole will be fnlfilJ ed. Certain it · 181 that he regarded the compromi. e line as utterly inadequate to arrest that fatn.l course of events w ltich Lis keen saga cit auticipatcd from the question. It was but a 11 reprieve.;, l\1ark the deeply melancholy impression which it made on his mind : 11 I regret that I am to die iu tho belief that the useless sn.crifice of Uwmselves by tllo generation of 1776, to acquire self-government and llappiness for themselves, is to be tiHown away by tho uu wise and unworthy passions of their sons and that my only consolation is to be, that I shall live not' to weep over it." Can any one believe, after listening to this letter, thnt J cffcrson is the author of the so-called Wilmot proviso, or ever favored it? And yet there arc at this time strenuous efforts making in the North to form a purely sectional party on it, and that, too, under tho sanction of those who profesH the highest veneration for }tis character and princi pies! * * * * * * I have now concluded the discussion, so fur as it relates to tho power; and hn ve, I trust, established, beyond contro ve rsy, that the 'rcrri to ri cs arc free, anu open to all of the citizens of the United State., and that th ere is no power, under any a pcct the suuj ect can be viewed in, by which the citizens of the South cau l>o excluded from emigrating with their property into any of th em. I have advanced no argument which I do not believe to be true, nor pushed any one beyond what truth would strictly warrant. But, if mistaken, if my nrgnments, in stead of being sound and true, as I hold them beyond controversy to be, should turn out to be a mere mass of sophisms ; and if, in consequence, the harrier oppo~c d by the want of power, should be snrmountcd, there is an other still in the way that cannot be. 'fhe mere possession of power, is not, of itself, sufficient to justify its exercise. It must be, in addition, shown, that in TilE AGITATION IN 1847-50. 3()9 the given case it can be rightfully and j ustly exercised. Under our system, the first inquiry i,, Docs the: Constitution autlwrizc the cxerci ·e of the power ? If that be decided in the affirm ative, the next is, C<tn it be rightfully atl<.l justly exercised under the circumsta.nccs ? And it is not until that, too, is decided in the affi rmative, that the qnrstion of the expediency of exercising iL is presented for consideration. Now, I put the guestion solemnly to t he Senators from the North: Can you rightly and justly exclude the South from the te rri tories of tbe Uni ted SLates, and monopolize them for yourselves, even if, in your opi nion, yon should have the power ? I t is this quest ion I wi~h to press on your attention, with all due solemnity and decorum. The North and the South stand in the relation of partners in a common Union, wi th equal dignity and equal rights. We of the South have cont.r il>uied our full share of funus, and shed our fnll share of blood, for the acquisition of onr territo ries. Cnn yo u, then, on any prim:iple of equity n.ncl jnstice, deprive us of our fLtll share in their benefit aud advantages ? Arc you ready to affiri u, that a majority of the partn ers in a joint concern have the right to monopolize its bcncfiLs, to the exclusion of' the minori ty, even in cases where they have contributed their full share to the concern ? OPINIONS OF MESSRS. CAS S, DICKINSON, A N D TOOMBS. In the Senate, 1850, Mr. Cass snid : "Tc nrc all aware that there arc various clauses of' the Constitution, and various other sources, fo'reign and d01nestic, whence this right of unlimited legislation over tho te rri to rics is sought to bo deduced. One of these, at least, is an rxprc s constitnt ional grant of power, nncl if it fai rly incl udes the antho1 ity to bind the tcrl'ito1·ics 1:n all cases whal:-;oel er, then there is an end of this qu cstioll , and we may pass this proviso, and 24 |
