[456]
neither has any Southern man asked that that decree should be repealed, or that those liberated under its provisions should be returned to slavery.
We only claim that there shall be an equality of immunities and privileges among citizens of all parts of the United States; that Mexican law shall not be applied so as to create inequality between citizens, by preventing the immigration of any.
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 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.
I can never consent to give additional power to a majority to commit further aggressions upon the minority in this Union; and will never consent to any proposition which will have such a tendency, without a full guarantee or counteracting measure is connected with it. I forbear commenting at any further length upon the propositions embraced in the resolutions at this time.
Remarks of
Davis of
Mississippi in the Senate of the United States, on the question of the reception of a memorial from inhabitants of
Pennsylvania and
Delaware, presented by
Hale of
New Hampshire, praying that Congress would adopt measures for an immediate and peaceful dissolution of the
Union.
February 8, 1850.
Mr. President: I rise merely to make a few remarks upon the right of petition, and to notice the error which I think has pervaded the comparisons that have been instituted between certain resolutions which were presented by the Senator from North Carolina and the petition which it is now proposed shall be received.
The resolutions which were presented from North Carolina were published in yesterday's paper, and, after reading them, I think they refer to a state of case which the people of North Carolina might properly present as their grievance.
They were resolutions for preserving the Union, calling upon Congress to take all measures in its power for that purpose.
This was all legitimate.
They had a right to petition Congress for a redress of grievances; and, if it were in our power to redress those grievances, if it were within the legitimate functions of our legislation, we were bound to receive the petition and respectfully consider it. This case is exactly the reverse.
Here is no grievance, unless the Union is a grievance to those who petition.
And they call upon Congress to do that which every one must admit Congress has no power to do—to dissolve peaceably the union of the States.
Then, sir, in the first place, there is no grievance; in the next place, there is no power; and, beyond all that, it is offensive to the Senate.
It is offensive to recommend legislation for the dissolution of the Union—offensive to the Senate and to the whole country.
If this Union is ever to be dissolved, it must be by the action of the States and their people.
Whatever power Congress holds, it holds under the Constitution, and that power is but a part of the Union.
Congress has
