The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 7, July 1903 - April, 1904 Page: 189
xvi, 340 p. : ill. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Adjustment of the ITBas Boundary in 1859. 189
compromise bill, and the amendment recognizing the boundary
claimed by Texas.
Any question relating to slavery in the territories involved the
area Texas was asked to cede,1 for its status, as free or slave, would
be determined by the bill itself or by territorial legislation. The
first amendment to the bill, offered by Senator Davis, of Missis-
sippi, was in effect to prevent the territorial legislature from legis-
lating against the right of property growing out of the institution
of slavery. He said it was introduced to test the sense of the sen-
ate, whether the right of property as it existed in the slave holding
states of the Union should receive the protection given to any other
property in the territories of the United States.2 Senator Seward
immediately proposed to strike out the amendment and insert the
Wilmot proviso. The amendments offered by these distinguished
ultraists, entertaining antagonistic policies, early forecast the char-
acter o(f the opposition to the compromise measures.
The question of the extension or restriction of slavery provoked
the bitterest discussion, and delayed the vote on the proposed meas-
ures. The Free Soilers maintained that the right delegated to
congress to organize governments for the territories included the
power of legislation for the inhibition of slavery; that equal rights
could only be claimed by the citizens of the States; that the insti-
tution existed only by virtue of local law; and that it "required
for its validity and legality previous express legislative enact-
ment."
On the other hand, the opinions of the South as to our system
of government and the equal rights of the states to the territories,
were clearly expressed in Mr. Calhoun's resolutions, introduced in
the senate in 1847,3 and in the very earnest and cogent argument
of Chief Justice Sharkey, of Mississippi, as quoted by Senator
Foote.4
Ancillary to the theory of the restrictionists was the contention
that as slavery was prohibited by the laws of Mexico throughout
Ier domain, including the portion Texas claimed, the lex loci, as
'Von Holst, Constitutional History of the United States, II 305.
2 Cong. Globe, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., 1003.
sStephens, Constitutioual View of the War Between the States, 11 197.
4Cong. Globe, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., 532-533.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 7, July 1903 - April, 1904, periodical, 1904; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101030/m1/193/: accessed May 7, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.