Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I., chapter 15 (search)
lavery Extension, and constituted the Committees of the House accordingly. Gen. B. Riley, the Military Governor of California, had issued June 3, 1849. a Proclamation calling a Convention of the People of California to frame a State Constitution. Such Convention was accordingly held, and formed a State Constitution whereby Slavery was expressly prohibited. State officers and members of Congress (all Democrats) were in due course elected under it; and Gen. Taylor communicated February 13, 1850. the Constitution to Congress, at whose doors the members elect from the new State stood for many ensuing months patiently awaiting their admission to seats. For, among the various propositions introduced at this session, looking to the same end, Mr. Clay had already submitted January 29, 1850. the following basis of a proposed Compromise of all differences relating to the territories and to Slavery: 1. Resolved, That California, with suitable boundaries, ought, upon her applic
Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, Appendix C (search)
the other, to disturb the country, and distract the legislation of Congress, to execute which we have our seats in this Chamber. For the reasons first stated, I voted to receive the resolutions that were presented by the Senator from North Carolina, and for the reasons I have just given shall vote to reject this petition. Conclusion of speech of Jefferson Davis of Mississippi in the Senate of the United States, on the resolutions of Clay, relative to slavery in the territories, etc., February 13 and 14, 1850. . . . Sir, it has been asked on several occasions during the present session, What ground of complaint has the South? Is this agitation in the two halls of Congress, in relation to the domestic institutions of the South, no subject for complaint? Is the denunciation heaped upon us by the press of the North, and the attempts to degrade us in the eyes of Christendom—to arraign the character of our people and the character of our fathers, from whom our institutions ar