The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 308
xxiv, 696 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
308
CONGRESSIONAL Gtofcfi
tingency of their becoming American citizens, when
the business of the company should fail in that re-
gion, (hunting, and trading m furs,) and it should
be obliged to move further north, in quest of game.
Mr. C. here went into a lengthened argument to
show that, as the agricultural colonization from this
country increased in the Oregon Territory, the in-
terests and motives of the Hudson Bay company for
continuing there declined; and its agents and retired
servants, becoming residents and cultivators, of ne-
cessity merged into the American population, not
deriving any title from the company to their lands,
for it had none to give, and possessing no grants
from the British government, which had never
assumed to make any.
He argued, from these premises, that, in the natu-
ral course of things, time was doing more for us than
either war or negotiation could do; that our citizens
were settling there as cultivators of the soil, and
would continue to emigrate there, till the country
was no longer fit for the occupation of mere trappers
and hunters. The Hudson Bay company and all
its retainers had already foreseen this, and prepared
for its retreat, by purchasing up the Russian Fur
company's right to hunting, trapping, and trading,
through the northern region to the frozen sea. In a
very few years our own population would, quietly,
peacefully, almost silently, take possession of the
territory. Already, every resident cultivating the
land,whether half breed or British subject, anxiously
desired to be numbered among American citizens,
and placed under the protection of our government.
Fully satisfied that this state of things was entire-
ly favorable to us, and that time was doing every
thing for this country that could be desired, he
would, for himself, be best pleased that the existing
convention should be allowed to remain in force for
20 years yet to come; being well convinced in his
own mind, that, by that time, all difficulty would
vanish, and that Great Britain would no longer
think of putting forward any claim to the terri-
tory.
He referred to the circumstances of England, which
had induced her wisest and most philanthropic states-
men to push emigration from the northern country
to the utmost limit, for purposes of colonization
abroad; and contended that, with all the zeal and
anxiety to raise up new colonies, Oregon had never
been mentioned as a place for British emigration:
showing plainly that the English government never
for a moment contemplated any such thing as an
agricultural occupation of the territory.
Mr. DAYTON next obtained the floor, and ex-
pressed his intention of addressing the Senate on
the subject; but, the usual hour of adjournment
having arrived, and considering that this was Wash-
ington's birth-day, he did not wish to detain the
Senate, and therefore moved an adjournment.
The question being put, was unanimously con-
curred in; and the Senate accordingly adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Thursrat, February 22, 1844.
VACANCIES JN THE COMMITTEES FILLED.
The SPEAKER, in compliance with resolutions
of the House, has made the following appointments
to fill vacancies that have occurred in the standing
committees by the resignations of Messrs. Wise,
Gilmer, and Wilkins:
Judiciary—Mr. Brodiiead.
Post Office and Post Roads—Mr. Thompson.
Foreign JSfj'airs—Mr. Dunlap.
The journal having been read,
Mr. J. P. KENNEDY announced the attendance
of his colleagues, Messrs. Causin, Preston, and
Brengi.e, lately elected representatives from the
State of Maryland; and these gentlemen having
presented themselves at the table, the oath to sup-
port the constitution was administered to tliem by
the Speaker.
REPORT ON THE RULES.
The SPEAKER announced that the first business
in order was the report of the Select Committee on
the Rules, on which subject the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. Delt.etJ was entitled to the floor.
Mr. HENLEY asked permission of the gentle-
man from Alabama to move for a suspension of the
rules, in order to submit a resolution fixing a day
for the adjournment of Congress; but Mr. Dellet,
learning that the time would be taken from the hour
allotted to him, declined giving way.
Mr. DELLET then observed that, in the remarks
}ie proposed to submit upon the question under con-
sideration, he should refer, in the first instance, to
facts and circumstances which had occurred there,
in presence of that national legislature; and he
should also refer to circumstances which were of ac-
knowledged record in the history of the country.
He should do so with fairness and impartiality; and
if the conclusions he should draw happened to be
unpalatable to some of those who listened to him,
he should not stop to inquire whether they were so
or not. He should endeavor to avoid several topics
which had hien cursorily adverted to in the debate,
and touch lightly on others which had been more
elaborately dwelt on.
The report of the select committee had presented
for the government of the proceedings of the House
a set of rules, with the old rule prohibiting the re-
ception of abolition petitions stricken out. There
would be but little debate on this question among
those who oppesed this motion, if the nature of the
circumstances under which this report was made
was reversed. If those who insisted on striking out
this rule were of the South, and the South were at
the north, what would be the laaguage of gentlemen
who now are such strenuous advocates for the recep-
tion of abolition petitions? They would be heard
holding up the constitution, proclaiming.it as the
sacred shield which would protect them in their
rights. They would not be heard, session after ses-
sion, and day after day, insisting on presenting
these petitions, and on their being referred and de-
bated; and in these conclusions he was warranted
by the facts. Mr. D. then went on to give a de-
scription of the various classes of abplition petitions
that had been presented, and asked for what pur-
pose they were brought here. No one believed that
Congress could act on this subject in any manner
whatever. Those who had been the most industri-
ous in the presentation of these petitions acknowl-
edged that Congress had no jurisdiction over the
subject. The member from Ohio, [Mr. Giddings,]
so anxious for something to hang an abolition
speech on, had seized upon the resolution of the
gentleman from New Hampshire, asking for infor-
mation in relation to the home squadron. The gen-
tleman asked for whose benefit this home squadron
was established, and then answered the question
himself. He said it was established to protect the
interests of the South, and to catch runaway ne-
groes, and added that he wished they would all run
away. The gentleman went farther, and said that
the national flag was disgraced in protecting the in-
terests of slaveholders. Was the national flag dis-
graced when it was supported by the father of his
country at Trenton, at Germantown, and at York-
town? Was it disgraced when it was borne by the
Pinckneys, and Laurenses, and Sumters, and Mari-
ons of the South, all slaveholders, when the British
army retreated before it? Was it disgraced when
planted by a single brigade, under the command of a
slaveholder, in the face of the British at Lundy's
Lane? Was it disgraced when borne by the hand
of a slaveholder at the sortie of Fort Erie?
Was it disgraced at Tippecanoe and the
Thames, when sustained and supported by the
gallant band who accompanied a slaveholder?
Was it disgraced and dishonored at the battle of the
Horse-shoe and at Pensacola, or at the battle of the
8th of January, when sustained by a slaveholder,
before a British army of superior force, and when
that army was vanquished? The gentleman, how-
ever, said that our flag was disgraced in protecting
the rights of the South; and this had been heard in
silence, and without rebuke. There had been no
indignation attempted to wither and blast the indi-
vidual who could thus dishonor his country, and
defame the living and the dead. But the gentleman
did not want the American flag to protect the inter-
ests of the South, because Ohio was taxed to sup-
port the navy. Was the South never taxed to de-
fend Ohio? The gentleman wished to wash his
hands of everything connected with slavery: but
his hands never could be washed; for his State had
dipped her hands tn the matter of which he com-
plained; and bear it he should, and bear it he must.
When Ohio adopted the federal constitution, why
did she not complain of this stigma of slavery, and
lefuse to take it as part and parcel of the compact'
But she did not complain: she adopted it, and took
upon herself all the obligations imposed by it. The
duty of the gentleman, therefore, to his country,
and his allegiance to his State, would compel him to
sustain that constitution, and prevent him from
washing his hands of one of its compromises.
One gentleman had said the world was at peace,and
therefore "cut down your navy." "You cannot ri-
val Great Britain, and therefore cut down your
navy." And gentlemen cried "cut down your
home squadron, and do not keep it to protect the
interests of the South, and to hunt and catch runa-
way slaves." And this was said and proclaimed at
a time when England was taking Oregon, and look-
ing for the control of Texas. Oh ! if |hose gentle-
man could only see Texas and Oregon, and the
West Indies, belonging to the same power that con-
trols Canada, then with them the delightful con-
summation of this abolition triumph would be ac-
complished; and thus the work of fifty-odd years
was to be put at hazard, and to be jeoparded; and
for what? Why, some gentlemen said merely to
gratify the abolitionists? They were to permit these
abolition petitions to be presented here, said some,
merely that the right of petition might not be in-
fringed ! They were to acknowledge the right to
present such petitions—the right to have them re-
ceived, referred, considered, and reported upon; and
thus the work of fifty years was to be put at hazard !
And gentlemen would see, unmoved, all that had
been accomplished, thus offered up to their Mo-
loch; and thus they could strike down the constitu-
tion, and all law and order which had been estab-
lished under that law.
Some gentlemen had contended, to strengthen the
claim to present these abolition petitions, that the
people had the right to petition for a redress of
grievances. Slavery, said the gentleman from
New York, [Mr. Beardsley,] is a grievance.
That was taken for granted; but the gentleman from
New York did not take time to prove it; nor did he
give himself any trouble to show to what part of
this nation, or to what portion of the people, it was
a grievance. The gentleman assumed it to be a
grievance; and if it were so, to whom was it a griev-
ance? Was it a grievance to those who were not con-
nected with it except incidentally—except that the
same general government extended over one portion
of this Union as well as the other? Was it a
grievance to the abolitionists? In what way
did it interfere with them ? Why, not at
all. The only connection they had with it was
brought about their own machinations; and because,
choosing to deem it highly immoral, they agitated
the country with a matter with which they had
nothing to do, in defiance of the constitution, and
of the duty which they owed to every part of this
Union. Viewing the matter thus, the gentleman
from New York had thought proper to extend to
the South some very gracious advice. The gentleman
said to the South, Keep cool; don't get excited. Oh,
no, don't get excited; receive these petitions, and this
agitation would be quieted—would abate. Now,
would that gentleman permit him [Mr. Dellet] to
give to him some advice? and it was, that he should
speak to his people in the North, on this abolition
question, in a different tone than that in which they
were usually answered. Let the gentleman tell
them, "so far as slavery in the States is concerned,
your petitions ought not to be received." Why?
Because the gentleman had told the House that if
the petitions asked for anything unconstitutional,
the House might reject them. That was one of his
postulates. Let him, therefore, tell his constituents,
that, on the subject of slavery in the States, their
petitionsought not to be received; they ought not to be
considered; and therefore that he would not present
them. If the gentleman would take this ground
sturdily at home, he would be better employed than
in advising the South to keep coo), when this agita-
tion was kept up around them, and when the abo-
litionists were boasting that their numbers were rap-
idly increasing.
But the gentleman said, though it was unconstitu-
tional to touch the question of slavery in the States,
it was constitutional to legislate on the subject of
slavery in the District of Columbia. Now, when
the constitution was adopted, whose interests were
involved? Did it not cover and protect the interests
of every individual over whom it was thrown?
Every part and parcel of the country was protected
nd shielded by that instrument. Where, then,
did the gentleman get hip doctrine, that Congress
could legislate on the subject of slavery, or abolish
slavery in the District of Columbia' Did he get
it from the cessions of Virginia or Maryland? If
he did, it was the first time that ever a lawyer had
pronounced the doctrine that the power to legislate
was power to change a constitution; or that an act
of a legislature was to alter, or abrogate, or amend
any portion of a constitution.
Mr. BEARDSLEY rose to explain.
Mr. DELLET declined to yield any portion of his
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book 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 Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/332/: accessed April 27, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.