Part 32

Mr. WOOD:--I wish my vote recorded in favor of the amendment.

Mr. COOK:--And so do I.

Mr. LOGAN:--I am the other way.

Mr. TUCK:--I dissent from the vote of New Hampshire.

Mr. GRANGER:--And I from that of New York.

Mr. WOLCOTT:--I dissent from the vote of Ohio. I notice that my colleague, Mr. CHASE, is not present at this moment.

Mr. BRONSON:--I also dissent from the vote of New York. My associate, GEN. WOOL, is confined to his room by a severe indisposition. For his benefit, and as I know he feels a deep interest in these votes, and desires to have his name appear upon the record, in his behalf I offer the following resolution:

_Resolved_, Whereas JOHN E. WOOL, a delegate from New York, is unable to attend the Convention, from sickness, therefore that he be permitted, when he does attend, or by communication in writing to the Secretary, to have his dissent recorded, as to any vote of his State.

This resolution was agreed to without a division.

The PRESIDENT:--The question now will be upon the adoption of the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. FRANKLIN), to the first section of the article reported by the committee.

Mr. FRANKLIN:--Before that question is taken, I desire to accept certain verbal amendments which have been proposed by various members, which will, I think, improve the substitute which I offer. These amendments are as follows:

1st. In the fifth line, as printed, after the words "nor shall any law be passed," insert the words "by Congress or the Territorial Legislature."

2d. In the sixth line, after the words "the taking of such persons," insert "from any of the States of this Union."

3d. In the eighth line, before the words "according to the common law," insert the words "course of the."

4th. In the seventh line, after the words "prevent the taking of such persons," insert the words "from any State in the Union."

These amendments I adopt, and wish them to be treated as incorporated into my substitute.

The PRESIDENT:--Such will be assumed as the pleasure of the Conference, as no objection is made.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--I am content, on the part of the committee, that the substitute offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania should be adopted in the place of the first section of the article reported by the committee. It amounts to the same thing, and is expressed in shorter and better language.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN:--I move to amend Mr. FRANKLIN'S substitute as follows:[3] I think these words would be more acceptable to the people of the Northern States.

[Footnote 3: This was a verbal amendment. I was not able to note it at the time, nor have I since been able to procure it.]

Mr. PALMER:--Does not the gentleman's amendment involve an Hibernicism? I think if we are to adopt the report of the committee, the FRANKLIN amendment admits of no improvement. It had better stand as it is. If we undertake to change it we shall all get to sea.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN:--I withdraw my proposition.

Mr. JAMES:--It was moved yesterday to insert the words, "or facilitate" after the words "hinder or prevent," in that part of Mr. FRANKLIN'S amendment which negatives the right to pass laws. What was done with that?

Mr. FOWLER:--Nothing. I moved it, and I insist upon the motion.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--I submit to the Conference whether this amendment is necessary or proper. Suppose some new question arises relating to slavery which it may be greatly for the interest of the Territory to protect. Suppose mines are discovered, and the Territory should want slaves to work them. Shall we put it into the Constitution that no law shall be passed to encourage their emigration?

Mr. BRONSON:--I see no need of it.

Mr. JAMES:--The point generally comes out. Now you say that you will have the right to go into the Territory with your slaves, and no law shall be passed to prevent you, no matter how much such a law would promote the material interests of the Territory. The converse of this you will not agree to. You are not content to let slavery stand by itself, you must have it nursed by the Territorial Legislatures. Does slavery always require such partiality? I say the power of the Legislature should be exercised on both sides, or it should not be exercised at all. I am trying to perfect the article. If it is to pass, and go to the people as a measure of pacification, and if you expect them to adopt it, you must not have it so one-sided and unfair. The people will understand it--it will be our duty to explain it to them, and to give them its history.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--But your amendment would prohibit the passage of a law permitting the transit of a slaveholder through the Territory with his property. Remember, also, that the prohibition only continues so long as the territorial condition exists.

Mr. SMITH:--Before this vote is taken, I wish to call attention to the character of the prohibition. "Nor shall any law be passed to hinder or prevent the taking of such persons to said Territory, nor to impair the rights arising from said relation," &c. Now, this is very broad. Suppose a law giving the right of transit to the people of the free States, or any law for their protection in the Territory, as inhabitants, is held by the Territorial Judge to "impair the rights arising from said relation." He holds it unconstitutional. Where is the remedy? What views are entertained upon some of these points in some sections of the South we know. If you do not adopt this amendment it is quite in the power of the Legislature to exclude any person from the Territory whose presence there may be thought injurious to slavery. Did the committee intend this?

The question upon the adoption of Mr. FOWLER'S amendment resulted as follows:

AYES.--Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa--10.

NOES.--New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Ohio--10.

So the amendment was rejected.

Mr. GROESBECK:--I move to amend the substitute offered by Mr. FRANKLIN, by inserting after the words "nor shall any law be passed," the words "by Congress or the Territorial Legislature." I think this is necessary to make our intention plain. Otherwise it might be said that the prohibition did not apply to Congress.

Mr. FRANKLIN:--I think the suggestion a very proper one. I will accept the amendment.

Mr. WILMOT:--I only wish to understand where we are. Have we disposed of the word "facilitate"?

The PRESIDENT:--That amendment was not adopted.

Mr. WILMOT:--Then I move to insert before the word "_status_," the word "legal."

Mr. RUFFIN:--That raises again every question we have been discussing. The word, as used in the substitute, only refers to the status _in fact_.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--This brings up all our old troubles. Let us reject it.

Mr. RANDOLPH:--I wish to understand this subject, and what will be the effect of adopting this amendment. I understand that the slave has what we call a _status_. The substitute of Mr. FRANKLIN is intended specifically to recognize and protect that _status_ in the Territories as fully as it is protected and recognized in the States. I think it has that effect. Adopt the amendment, and the effect is precisely the opposite. The amendment rescinds the _status_.

Mr. PALMER:--I wish to make an inquiry of the mover. Does the amendment, after all, make any difference? Must not any _status_, not against law, be, of necessity, a _legal_ status?

Mr. WILMOT:--No. I think there is a wide difference, and the South thinks so. One is a status in fact, the other, one in law.

Mr. LOGAN:--I hope we shall not adopt the amendment. We all want these questions settled. The amendment opens them all wider than before. If we intend to give the South the right she asks for, and, as I think, rightfully asks for, let us give it to her in plain and unequivocal language. Let us not give her a legacy of litigation, by using words which mean one thing or the opposite, according to the construction you place upon them. I wish to settle all these questions fairly. The amendment leaves the question as to what constitutes a _legal status_, to be decided by the Court. The North would claim that there cannot be such a thing as a legal status, a legal condition of slavery. The South would claim the opposite.

Mr. WILMOT:--If the amendment of the gentleman from North Carolina had been adopted, I would not have moved this. The section then would have been unambiguous and clear. Now it is all open to construction.

Mr. CHASE:--In my judgment it is unimportant whether the amendment is adopted or not. The condition of the slave in the Southern States is one arising out of law, established by legislative provisions. _Status in fact_ must mean _status in law_ as well as _status in fact_.

I have listened with attention to the appeals made by gentlemen who urge the interests of the South in favor of a settlement of these questions. But you are now prosecuting a plan which will be the subject of debate throughout the country. Adopt your article in either form, and the question, What does status mean? will still remain.

A majority of the people have adopted the opinion that under the Constitution slavery has not a legal existence in the Territories. The triumph of this opinion is not the result of any sudden impulse. A President has been elected, and a Government will soon be organized, whose duty it will be to respect and observe the opinions of the people. You are now seeking, by the adoption of a single section, to change these opinions and this policy. Do not deceive yourselves, gentlemen. You will never accomplish this result so easily. You are presenting such a subject for debate and excitement as the country never had before. It is best we deal frankly.

The vote was taken upon the adoption of the amendment, and resulted as follows:

AYES.--Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa--9.

NOES.--Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Ohio--11.

And the amendment was rejected.

Mr. GOODRICH:--I move to insert in the substitute offered by Mr. FRANKLIN, after the words "south of that line," the words "not embraced by the Cherokee treaty."

A word of explanation. Do we intend to prohibit the Cherokee Nation from changing the status of persons within their Territory, if they think proper to do so? Would not this be a violation of our understanding, if not of our treaty stipulations with these Indians?

Mr. EWING:--I have looked into this subject, and I do not think the proposition would be improved by the amendment.

Mr. GOODRICH:--Then I will withdraw it for the present.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--I hope the vote on the main question will now be taken. It is evident that the sense of the majority is against accepting amendments.

Mr. GOODRICH:--That obliges me to renew my motion. I do renew it, and ask for a vote by States.

The vote upon the amendment offered by Mr. GOODRICH was taken, with the following result:

AYES.--Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa--11.

NOES.--Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri--9.

So the amendment was adopted.

Mr. TURNER:--I move to amend the substitute offered by Mr. FRANKLIN, by inserting after the words "hinder or prevent," the words "or encourage."

I think there is a palpable difference between the word "encourage" and the word "facilitate." The former is broader and less restricted. If this measure is to be commended to the favor of the North, it should be deprived of this one-sided character.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--We have already decided this question. In every practical sense the words are synonymous.

The vote was taken upon the amendment offered by Mr. TURNER, and resulted as follows:

AYES.--Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa--10.

NOES.--New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Ohio--10.

And the amendment was lost.

Mr. GUTHRIE:--I ask the Conference now to let us have a vote.

Mr. SEDDON:--Not just yet. I move to amend the substitute offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, by the insertion after the clause providing for the division of the territory, of the following:

"All appointments to office in the Territories lying north of the line 36° 30´, as well before as after the establishment of Territorial governments in and over the same, or any part thereof, shall be made upon the recommendation of a majority of the Senators representing, at the time, the non-slaveholding States. And, in like manner, all appointments to office in the Territories which may lie south of said line of 36° 30´, shall be made upon the recommendation of a majority of the Senators representing, at the time, the slaveholding States. But nothing in this article shall be construed to restrain the President of the United States from removing, for actual incompetency or misdemeanor in office, any person thus appointed, and appointing a temporary agent, to be continued in office until the majority of Senators as aforesaid may present a new recommendation; or from filling any vacancy which may occur during the recess of the Senate; such appointment to continue _ad interim_. And to insure, on the part of the Senators, the selection of the most trustworthy agents, it is hereby directed that all the net proceeds arising from the sales of the public lands, shall be distributed annually among the several States, according to the combined ratio of representation and taxation; but the distribution aforesaid may be suspended by Congress, in case of actual war with a foreign nation, or imminent peril thereof."

Mr. SEDDON:--I invite the careful and deliberate attention of the Conference to the provisions of this amendment. It is commended by high authority. It is commended by nothing inferior to the wisdom and experience of our honored President. It is intended as a division of the territory between the North and the South.

Now, to insure a fair operation of the provisions of the Constitution, as they will stand in that instrument when amended as we propose, we deem it very essential that the rights of the southern section should be secured by such an amendment as this. It will be noticed that Mr. FRANKLIN'S substitute precludes us from any appeal to Congress or the Territorial Legislatures for affirmative protection. The powers of those bodies will be negative only. We have nothing left, then, but the Federal Courts. We ask now that we may not be subjected to the government and power of Federal officers, whose opinions are against us--who will exercise those powers for our oppression. Congress or the President may send into a Territory in the southern section, a set of officers who are anti-slavery propagandists, who will exercise all their official powers to our injury. I hold this amendment to be eminently just and fair. We have no protection from Congress; none from the Legislature. Is there a chance, even, unless such a provision is adopted, that the South will ever be placed in the favorable possession or enjoyment of the rights you are willing to concede to us?

The latter portion of the amendment is equally just. The Government holds the public lands in trust. It is better to divide their proceeds at short intervals, and thus remove the subject from all danger of corrupting influences. But I shall leave this to be discussed by the mover.

Mr. PALMER:--I move to rescind the ten-minute rule adopted by the Conference, so far as the President is concerned.

The motion of Mr. PALMER was agreed to without a division.

President TYLER:--I am very grateful for the compliment which the Conference extends to me in the vote which has just passed. I will not abuse its kindness.

The amendment which is offered may, at first sight, appear to be extraordinary; but I wish to say, in all seriousness, that all my experience in public life leads me to favor its adoption. I wish to have the Conference understand fully its import and meaning.

That policy is the best, which reduces within the narrowest limits the patronage to be exercised by the Executive authority. Every party out of power has discovered that in the patronage of the President there is a voice of greater potency than is heard elsewhere in the Government. This amendment places a limitation upon the power of the President. It confers upon a majority of the Senators from each section the power to recommend appointments to office, and this will be found in practice equivalent to the power of appointment. It is the only practicable limitation of Executive patronage. The power of the Executive in this Government is very great. Limit it, abridge it as you may, and the President will have a power in the Government which is not possessed by any sovereign of any throne in Europe.

This is not a political question. Our warrant for the adoption of this plan will be found in the tranquillity it will give to the country--in the peace which will result from it. We are now settling differences between the States. Adopt this provision, and we secure unanimity forever. You will always find that dissatisfaction is confined to limited portions of the country. The North is content with the existing state of things--so is three-fourths of the South. Remove this power from the Executive, and those measures will be adopted which will promote the welfare of the greater number. Do you not see that you have in this way good security for the selection of the best men?

Suppose the Government should start to day on this new policy--that it should avoid all propagandism--should place honest, competent men, only, in office--should let all others understand that there was no chance for them--should permit both sides, all sides to be fairly represented. You would ensure peace, secure quiet in the country forever. You would thus heal the wound, not cicatrize it. How small would be the cost of so great a victory!

May I not go one step farther. I have heard with pleasure the feelings expressed, the references made, to the Cotton States. I have scarcely heard an unkind word said against them. We have come here to cement the Union--to make that Union, of which gentlemen have so eloquently spoken, permanent, noble, and glorious in the future as it has been in the past--not to be content with it as a maimed and crippled Republic.

Now, eight flourishing States are practically lost to us. The crest of the noble Mexican Gulf has separated from us. Let us exert every power we possess to bring them all back to the fold. Why should we not? Every motive of interest or patriotism should induce us to do so. Suppose the States were vacillating and in doubt where to go. Suppose they were set up for sale in market _overt_, and the States of Europe were to bid for them--for this, not only the richest portion of our own country, but of the world--because this portion of our land has an element of wealth and power which must be prized and valued wherever commerce is known. What would not one of the Powers of Europe give for this favored section? The treasures of the continent would be opened. Nations would unlock the caskets of their crown jewels to secure it. England would double her national debt to have it; so would France; so would Russia. And yet we stand here higgling over these little differences which alone have caused our separation. Is it not better that we should rise to the level of the occasion, and meet the requisition of the times, instead of expending precious hours in the discussion of these miserable abstractions?

We talk about the events of the Revolution and their consequences. Have we forgotten our revolutionary history? Have we forgotten the MARIONS, the SUMTERS, the PICKENS, of those times? Has the spirit of sacrifice which, animated those men wholly departed from their descendants? God forbid!

Our body politic is not free from disease. The disease should be treated properly and judiciously. Whenever disease shows itself we should apply a suitable remedy--one that is suggested by the pharmacy of mutual brotherhood, and yet powerful enough to reach every nerve in our political system.

It is to accomplish this purpose that we have come together. It is to secure this desirable result that I urge the adoption of this amendment. I press it because I feel that it will give peace to all sections. Adopt it, and from that moment you may date the beginning of the return of the seceded States into the fold of the Union. How heartily would we welcome their return! Do we not all desire it? Has not Virginia a heart large enough to give them their old place in the Union? Has not Rhode Island and New Jersey?

I say my proposition will accomplish this, and a single reason will disclose the ground of my faith. It preserves the equilibrium, the balance of power, between the sections. It enables each section to appoint its own officers, to protect its own interests, to regulate its own concerns. It is fair and equal in its operations. With it, no section can have any excuse for dissatisfaction. I pledge the united support of the South to the Union, if it is adopted.

The latter branch of the amendment looks to the annual distribution of the net proceeds of the sales of the public lands among the several States. This was one of the favorite ideas of HENRY CLAY. His argument upon this subject, to my mind, was always conclusive. Will the party which has adopted his principles repudiate this, or will its members put their feet down firmly and give it their support?

I have watched the operations of this Government with great interest and care, and I have noticed that every approach toward making each source of revenue or expenditure separate and independent of all others, tended to the profit and advantage of the Government, and increased the chances of securing honorable and honest agents to transact its business. A marked instance of this will be found in the administration of the affairs of the Post Office Department. And here I cannot refrain from relating an anecdote which is strongly in point, and which forms one of the pleasantest recollections of my own connection with the administration of the General Government.