—■=gg^Bgßgg | " 1 jiiae—-s=g i, i m , i, mn THE STAR OFV THE NORTH. I.W. Wttiir ProprtoUr.] Truth aid Right—Gad aid ar Cnitry. ~ [twa 0llars par ia am VOLUME 6. THE STAR OF THE NORTH It published every Thursday Morning, by It. W. WEAVER. 011 ICE—Up stairs, in the new brick building on the south side of Main street, third square beluw Market. TXRMS:— Two Dollars per annum, if paid within six months from the time of sub scribing ; two dollars and fifty cents if aot paid within the year. No subscription re- \ ce.ved for a less period than six months: no : discontinuance permitted un'il all arrearages "are paid, unless t the option of the editor. ALVF.RTIBEMXNTS not exceeding one square wiH be inserted three limes for one dollar, and twenty-five cents for each additional in sertion. A liberal discount will be made to those who advertise by the year. •m il i i • SPEECH OF lion. Ilendrick B. Wright On the Nebraska Bill, delivered in the House of Congress, April 4 th 1854. Mr. WRIGHT, of Pennsylvania, arose and said: I had not designed, Mr. Chairman, to say anything upon the subject of the Nebras ka and Kansas bill. 1 bad made up my mind to vote in favor of that bill, provided the Clay ton amendment be rescinded, and cot to trouble the House with any observa tions upon it But, sir, fortunately or unfor tunately, my disrict adjoins the one whiih is the residence of Mr. David Wilmol, the Mher of the Wilntot proviso, and which is how represented by niy colleague, [Mr. GROW ] Mr. Wilmol has been engaged du ring the pruent week in agitating this sub ject within* e limits of my district, and it tnerefore become me to defend myself. I have not risen to make a charge against any one. lam acting upon the detensive. On Tuesday last a large meeting, or what is represented by the public prints to have been a large meeting, waaAald in the city ot Car bondale, Luzerne is a portion of the district that to rep resent. He made meeting, and the first it was the receipt of three I presented to the House yesterday, signed by one hun dred and four leading and prominent citi zens of that place, asking that this bill may become a law; so that 1 think the impress ion made by Mr. Wilmol in tire city of Car- Dor.daie did not come up to the expectation of the enemies of the bill. Mr. Chairman, as I have already said, I here is one feature in this bill that should be amended. I hope it will be done. I do nol say thai ilshal. be a sine qua noa Willi me that that provision shall be amended ; but I know that I could nol vote for the bill with the clause as it stands, and sustain myself in my district, without great difficulty. I bave lire pledge, however, ol Ihe chairman of the Committee on Territories, that the clause, so far as he is concerned, shall be amended. Mr. WASHBURNK, of Illinois. What clause is that? Mr. WRIGHT. The clause which was changed by the Clayton amendment. If that clause is stricken oat, I am ready to sus tain the bill by my vote in the House, and before the country. 1 ant ready to sustain it because it involves a great, and important, and mighty principle—the principle of Slate rights arid popular sovereignty. Upon that foundation lam ready to stand or fall. 1 say, here, to-day. in rny place in the Amer can Congress, that 1 would rather be stticken down as an advocate of popular sovereignty, then be returned again to Ibis House for hav ing sustained a position hostile to that great priticii'ta- Therefore, so far as regards my return to this House, it is a matter which 1 care not. I reject such a consideration as a natter of no earthly importance. I shall (how this committee that there has never been any portion of territory acquired by this Goverumeut but through the most severe opposition, and 1 might say, almost at the point of the bayonet. There never has been • Territory organized under this Govern nent that has not met with the strongest op position in this House. There has uever been a State organised which, when ma king application for admission into this Un ion, but has met with the same opposition i and to-morrow, If Spain ware to give us dteds of cession of the Island of Cuba, and her Britanio Majesty were to give us deeeds of caaeion of Canada East and Weal, there woold be a party that would vole against ac cepting either, with or with or without sla very , and if they did not vote against ac cepting, it would be in opposition to all for mer precedents in onr history, where the question of organizing Territories has been brought in issue. Ido not know why this is. (do not know why there should be, in this country, even a respectable party that should be opposed to tha acquisition of territory or tha extension of tha area of fraadom. I do not know why it should be ao; but to it it, and such is the undeniable fact. There is BO disputing this fact. On Ihe 23d of October, 1803, the Senate bill to enable tha President of lha United Btales to lake possession of lite territory ce ded to the United States by France passed this House by a vote of 89 yeas and 23 nays. That is, after lha territory had been purchas ed from France, comprising that great valley of the Mississippi, of which tbo French Minister said, when expostulating with Na poleon Bonapart against its cession to this country, that it bad territory sufficient to sup ply fifty millions of human beings with al< necessaries that the wants of man could da. aim- After this territory had been purchas ed and paid for by the Uniied States, either ha money or by their bonds, on the day to 1 here relayed, them wen twenty- BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PA., THURSDAY. APRIL 27, 1854. three gentlemen who voted agaitat taking possession of it. Louisiana waa admitted into the Union on the Blh of April, 1819. Oc the qoeation of the admission of that State, I find, by the reference to the printed JonrnaJa of thie Bouse, that the vote waa 79 yeas and II nays. On the 26tb of February, 182!, the State of Missouri was admitted into lbs Union by , a vote of yeas 87, nays 81. On the 13th ol I June, 1836, the State of Michigan was ad mitted into the Union by a vote of yaaa 133, nays 45. On the 15tb -of June, 1836, the State of Arkansas waa admitted into (be Un ion by a vote of 143 yeas to 50 nays. I have other references hers with regard to the vote of this House, to which, however, 1 shall not direct attention, because it is not necessary to establish the position which I assume in iny argument. Bat I havesbown this committe enough to inform them of the fact that it has made no difference with re gard to the admission of States into the Un ion, or the organization of terrirory There has been that steady, unyielding determina tion on the part of the minority in Congress generally, to resist everything which looked towards the establishment of Territories, the erection of new States, or the extension of the area of freedom. We meet with the same determination here in the bill that .has been reported in this Congress. To-day the argument assumes'this shape ; to morrow it assumes another shape. But there is always an argument, or a pretext of an argument in opposition to the extension of territory. I belong, Mr. Chairman, to the progress ive party in this land. Ido not deny it. I acknowledge it openly, and above board. I do not conceal it. And the man who does not belong to the progressive party of the age, is far in the rear. The destiny of the nation is not confined to its present limes. lis march is onward. The feeling is fully real ized here ; and its influence spread over the whole globe itself. Why, sir, the objection to Ibis bill? Why is it that we hear agitation on all sides of us. The gentlemen from North Carolina who has just taken bis seat, [Mr. CUNGNAN.] has already inlormed this committee that lie en tenanted doubts with reference to the sin cerity of gentlemen, because their position changed as it became necessary to change them in order that lliey might carry out that hostility to the measure which would have a tendency to defeat it. Is there any differ eneff between this bill and the bills that have been heretofore presented with reference to the organization of Territories! The very words of the sixth section of the bill that has been reported by the Committee on Ter ritories in the House were in the bills organ izing Utah and New Mexico. The very words are preserved verbatim. Ann I want here the indulgence of tbecommiitee to te fer them to the sixth section of ihe bill, be cause 1 regard that as the prominent fea ture of the compromise of 1850. The sixth section is in these words ; " That the legislative power of the Ter titory shall extend to the rightful subjects 'of legislation consistent witb the Constitution of the United States, aud the provisions of this act." The Legislative power of the Territory as regards all consistent constitutional legis lation is vested in the people of ihe Territo ry. And these words which 1 have referred to, and read to the commiuee, are the very words contained in the two bills lo which 1 have already made reference—namely Ihe bills organizing the Territories of New Mex ico and Ulah. Well, it is objected, by those who are op posed lo this bill, that there it a repeal of the Missouri Compromise. A repeal of what compromise? Who gave the act of 1820 the name of a compromise? Who gave the name of compromise to an ordinary act of legislation ? The very men called this a compromise, which they have incessantly opposed in Congress and out of Congress ever since the enactment, at different limes nnder different names, but uniform, steady, and persevering at,ill times. And when was that act rf 1820 ever adhered to, either by Congress or by the people of the American nation ? It has been a dead letter npon the statute-book for the last thirty years. In 18. 48, when the Territory of Oregon wa* about to be organized, tbe men who called that measure a compromise voted against its ex tension to the Pacific, upon lbs ground that it was aot a compromise. What power has this body—l speak of the Congress ol the United Slates—to fix any line of demaikation passing over the terri tory of a new State, defining on which side slavery shall or shall not be tulerated ? 1 understand that the Government ta the pro prietor of tha public domain. It may use it in certain ways, and make alt needlul rules and regulations in regard to it. It may make military roads over it. and erect military defenses; but tbe jurisdiction of Ibe territory in the Slates. Congress is a trustee for them only. The faatona ordinance of 1787, dnelared that slavery should not exist north of the Ohio river. The first Territorial Legislature which met under that law, as an organized Territory, enacted laws which provided for the surrender of the slave lo his master, and subjected him letbe dominion of bis will: and that, too, within a free Territory. I bave not the statlue-book, but I can refer this commit'.# to it, which shows that slavery ex isted after tha adoption of that ordinance, north of tbe Ohio river. That ordinance waa treated as a dead-latler, from tbe reas on that both tha law and tha ordinance en oroachad opoo '.ha popolu will. The power which makes • statute ean re peal it. The power which makes a statute exceeding Ihe limits of tha Constitution, makes a statute which is null and void.— This no man will pretend to deny—lawyer or layman. Bat, sir, thare teat a Missouri compromise, as Mr. Niles says in his Register, to wbi oh I refer, but only to a simile paragraph. Mis souri was a party to that compromise. To tha act of 1820 neither Missouri, or any other State or person, was a party, and there fore it was not a compromise. Mr. Niles says, tri hi* Weekly Register of the date Of 3d March, 18211 "The Missouri question is at last settled, so far as it depends upon the act of Congress. The manner of it has not pleased either par ty, and some express the opinion that the Legislature of Missouri will refuse to lo ac cept the condition, but we cannot believe that it is possible." ■- There was a compromise, and the Mis souri was a party tb it. It wan when Mis souri came here asking lo be ad .nitted as a State. She might well have exclaimed, though, in the terms imposed, in the lan guage of St. Paul to the Governor of the Roman Province, "Would that thou wert not almost, but altogether9Bch as 1 am this day, save these bonds." She had upon her statute-book a law pro hibiting the emigration of free negroes with in her borders; and who but the people of ihe State of Missouri was interested in this quesiion ? She was informed by Con. great that this feature must be siricken out before she could be admitted. She yielded. But, sir, she wa* humiliated before the power of the National Government. Sis did oon senl to abandon her own right of popular sovereignty, and struck out this clause.— There was a compromise—a forced compro mise ; such a compromise as power alone dictates to weakness—such a compromise us the superior alor.e has the right to impose upon die interior. But it was, nevertheless, a compromise, because Missouri acceded to it. Rathet than not come into the Union at all, she consented to take the terms of the Government: and Mr. Monroe, the then President Of the United Smtes, issued his proclamation, declaring that Missouri, hav ing complied with ihe requisitions of Con gress, a* contained in the proposition repor ted by Mr. Clay, who was Chairman of the Committee to which the matter was refer red, WHS now one of the sovereign States of the Union. There was a compromise, be cause Missouri was a party lo it as welt as the National Government. But there was no compromise made previous tolhat lime ; and what has been designated as a compromise, was simply an act of ordinary legislation, having no feature about it which could be tortured into a compact of two or more pat ties. It has beer, denied by Statesmen in this country lhat Congress has Ihe power even to organize a territory. I bave read with a great deal ol pleasure and saiitfaciiuri a very able speech made by the honorable gentleman of Ohio [Mr. DISNEY] during the last Con gress upon this subject, in which he takes the ground thai the power is not m Congress according to the language of tha Constitu tion, even to organize a Territory ; and the inference be draws from the argument is, that the power is vested in tbe people of the Territory. That is the view I take of tbe matter. I hold lhat the pioneers who go lo 1 a Territory have the right to settle there, and take with them any property they may choose and lo make their own laws, subjects, how ever, to the constitutional restraints as to their republican character. I ask whether my friend from South Carolina, [Mr. RBETT,] now sitting before me, has not just as rnuclt right lo go into with his property as 1 have to go there from Pennsylvania with my properly ? Slaves in the South are prop erty. We have what we call properly in Ihe North, and there is no bond of mutual un ion if I may go to the Territory of Kansas with my property, and a southern gentle man must at the same time be prohibited from going tiiere with his. Where is the mutuality of such a principle ? Partial would be tbat legislation il Conures* should assume ot rather usurp the power of deter mining what shall and wnat shall not be properly within the limits of a sovereign State. The southern States came into the Union originally when all the State* helJ stave*—each a sovereign government of it self. There was not n State in the Union in 1776 but wa* a slaveholding State. I be lieve that I am correct in regard to that. The Uuion was formed ; the compact was made, and now shall it be said lhat the northern States, after they have abolished slavery from their statute books, blotted it out for ever, shall, in a spirit of dictation towards the southern States, coerce them who were also a parly to the compact J It cannot be; and the people of trie North , with enlarged judgement, with the beoefit conferred on them by common school* and education wherever this question it presented to them in its proper light, must come to the conclu sion that the sensible view is tha only oue that can be taken of any subject, either ol morals, poltiio* or religion. It has been sa>d that it is the friends of this bill who have sought to agitate tbe quesiion of slavery. 1 like to see agitation. I like agitation, for it always resu ure of truth. deny the bill, or those utio the House in tbe same shape— its features of popular ed with other territorial biUa I deny that tha [^endemen^vbo^iaf^rou^r^h^bdlTaiT Congress ate agitators. But call them so if you please. lam willing la agitate on this or any other question whiclislioi ta truth.— There has never been a gram princible set tied in the world but what has been lha re sult ot agitation. There was great agitation at Runnyraeda where the Ceqtmont of Eng land summoned Ktug John ,1o meet dram, and when they rang from him Magna Char ta, the bill of rights, lha bnttwark ol English liberty. There was great agitation (hare at that time—and why! Bscaqoe lha same principle waa involved tbqtjf now involv ed in (he Kansas and ReSr&M biff. There was agitation al the lime theyjtbrew the lea overboard at Boston, and (Me was agita tion at Faneuil Hall. And thro was agita tion in Virginia when Patrick Henry made that great appeal— 'as for me (ive me lib erty, or give me death I" Tiire was agi tation when Jackson put hieb ck upon the Constitution, and his face ag inst the en croachment of the Federal Government, and when, like an old Romar as he was, vetoed ihe United Stales Blah bill, and I Maysville road bill there stagnation then, but il settled a great principle And what was the prinoiple f II waa Congress | had no right to encroach up 4h the power of the Slates and populai iovereignty.— There was a land mark established by Jack son in those two vetoes, which have done more toward the establishment of Slate rights in this Uuion than all giber things which have occurred since m"foundation ol the Government' But Congress, in its wisdom, may assume the power lo pass laws wiih regard to the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska; but be cause they do ; does ihat determine their power to do so ? Let Congress pause and in quuire into the constitutionality of the act before they assert that they have the right to legislate for the sovereign people of s free Territory. I ean never give my assent to such doctrine; I can never yield to a ques tion of lhat kind, because, if there ia any people on the face of God's earth who bave just cause to be proud of their high and ek" ailed po.- ilioi:, it is the peopfegif this laiitti ami because the power is in theil hands, and not in a superior body. Ami the moment you say, by legislative enactment, that ques tions ot local law can. he .Kansas and Nebraska by Congress, and not by the people, you destroy ihe very fundamental principle of the Government that has been adopted from the Revoletion down to the present time. This is a bill of popular sov ereignty. It is a bill under which the pion eer who may go from my district to seek a western home, has a right to go there, not under the dictation of this government, but as a free man, surrounded by the constitu tional rights of his own State, and clothed with the panopoly of her power; and he who would curtail or abridge any of those rights ol the freemen of the country, does not in my humble opinion—and I say it without any design to give offense—enter tain a just conception with regard to those principles npon which this Government is founded. Speaking of agitation A J feoqjd Jlfiprv.my, desk, the other morning, the prooeedings ,of a meeting held in the district represented by my colleague upon tbe left, (Mr. TROUT) and among the renolulions adopted at that meeting, there wa* one to which I desire to call ihe attention of the committee, to show them in what chaste and modest language men ia this Hall, acting under the sanctity ot a constitutional oath, are denounced as "traiiors" and "scoundrels." I want to show you how we are regarded in some por tions of our own State for standing up for this great principle of pogajar rights and sovereignly. 1 hold in' the pro. ceeding ol a meeting held county of Beaver; and I will read two of the resolu tions as an earnest of what they all are; "Itcsolved, That Stephen A. Douglas aud the other demagogues in Congress, who are favoring the proposed outrage, deserve the execration of all ■■ fix disgra cing their official positions by urging one pottion of tha Union into the guilt of a breach of faith toward another portion, lhat .would disgrace a cnniuniiy of freebooters." So much-for that, tbe resolution is in Mill choice language; " Resolved, That we will bold every Sen ater and member of Congress from a free Stale, who shall give countenance to this threatened outrage upon our rights, as a trai tor gully "f betraying the cause of Itberiy for gold, ortell-pronioliun, or both-" These resolutions <vsre (tossed at a meet ing held in the only Free-Soil district in the State ol Pannaylvmiia,fo*l t'eiievs that tha on* represented by my colleague (Mr. TROUT) ia the only one in the Slate where there is a Free-Soil majority. In there resolutions they say that Mr. Douglass is a "traitor," and tbat every member ol Congress from a free State, who shall "give countenance lo the outrage," is a "traitor guilty of hetrayiog the cume of liberty for gold, or self-promofiou, or both.'* Is that agitation 1 Ido uot know what more insulting ;ermt could be culled from tbe vocabulary of the English language, than those contained in these resolutions.— I That insti in this House, acting nnder the •auction of an oath, under what they regard as a constitutional duly in reference to a great and important question ; are not only to be denounced us demsgogues," but as "traitors," and "freebooters,'' is not to be quietly endu red. Tbe motives which impel such con duet are badge* of a darker aga and lass en ightsned than the present. 1 knew vary | well that my honorable friend [Mr. TROUT] who represents t hat dialriot had no part or parcel in anything of this kind. I should have referred to the resolutions if they had bean presented from my own district, and in the same language. I have done it only to show to what extremes the Free-Soil party in Pennsylvania have gone in lhair opposition to Ibis bill. Now I contend that was the quarter from which agitation comes. The agitation was certainly not commenced upon the part of members of Congress, who present the bill here in (be same language precisely as the bill o rgani'zing the Territories of Utah and New Mexico, and against which not a murmur was heard The agitation brought to bear against this Mil is created by its enemies and in opposition to popular pow er. I have heard it said a thousand limes that the two great political parties met at Baltimore in convention and resolved not to agitate. I ask this committee, I ask the nation, if the two parlies that met in Bal timore previous to the last presidential can vass, did uot pass resolves, that no more territory should be organized or oo more States should be admitted into the Union? But these conveniions regard slavery agita ion as a finality. They so treated it. The moment that there is an effort made here to establish what comes within the proper and legitimate definition of popular right, agitation most necessarily follow, and it cannot be avoided. It is the best and wi sest legislation that ever meets with the se verest opposition. If has ever been and will continue to be so. I will now refer to another section of this bill to show upon what terms this Ter ritory shall come in as a State It is con tained in the first section in these wotds. " When admitted as a State or States" re ferring to the territory of Nebraska and j Kansas "the said Territory or any portion of , the same shall be received |info the Union \ with or without slavery aslheir constitution inav prescribe at the time their admis sion." IB These Siaies may come Bo the Union with or without slavery people may have determined, formed the constitution that is to the admission of the Slate. HaaTiongress the power ta say that that State shall come into | the- Union with or without olavery f- If C<m \ gresscau decide tha! question, then I con. ! teud that Congress can decide any olhei j question with regard to local laws or legis lation. But the bill provides that the ques | lion of slavery, or ua slavery shall be vested where it only belongs, in the popular sov. ereignty. There il is safe. While Ido not stop to argue the constitutionality of what is called the Mistouri compromise—l call it the Missouri law of 1820—I say that so far as that is concerned, wherever it usurps the principle of popular sovereignty il it not bunting and lias no validity. Congress has j not the power to legislate in regard to the { establishment of a line. This bill provides - that power with regrrd to these local ques tions shall be vested in the people ol the Territory. There are gentlemen upon tnis floor who say, that that privilege shall be in ami from the people and vested some where else. 1 ask tliem to pause and ex. ; amine the patent of iheir authority before | they act. When has such a theory been | regarded as orthordox in the history of the : country? The very question that gave rise j to the Revolution was because the English | Government wnnld not permit the colonies j to regulate their own local affairs. Congress I has no more power to establish or to re | strict slavery io a Territory or in a State than to exercise it withiu the territory of the Cnriadis. The very principle which is conceded to the people of the Territory in I this bill is ihe very principle which caused ' i the revolt of the colonies prior to 1776. It ' was contended by the colonists that they ' had a right of representation ; it was con i tended that the intposiliou of onerous bur ' dens was placed upon them by the mother : country ; it was ceiitende'i that they had I lights which the mother country and the ' Government disregarded. In other words, they were totally dependent. They had no leature of sovereignty. Agitation, howev er, changed the state of affairs. And this was not the first instance wherein agitation was attended wub good results. It was no: either the last. Now, sir, I said, with reference to another pari of this bill, that there is a clause which •tiould undoubtedly come out of it. lam nut prepared, however, lo say it is sine qua non with me lhat il snoiild. A large portion ol the emigrant* who go lo all of our new Territories aru alien* ; and 1 uiidtrsiatid thai tliey have always been permitted, in all .the Territories, whenever they havo filed their declaration of intention to become citizens of the United Stales, to participate in ihe election*, and to lake a part in the affairs ol Ihe Goverumeut. It ia right and proper thai it should be so. 1 understand that this sys tem has been pursued partly from usage and partly bom the very necessities of the case. Now, Mr. Chairman, there is no reason why tha Territories of Kansas and Nebraska should be restricted to a different rule from lhat of the other Territories tbat bave been hitherto admitted into the Union ; and inas much as aliens who bad filed their declara tion ul iriieniion to become citizens were permitted to participate in the tormaiion of territoral laws and in territorial elections, the same rules should be applied lo the pres ent organization ; and it ia extended by the terms and provisions ol the original bill.— How this amendment found its way into the Senate bill, 1 am nol prepared to say. It was iugralUKt lot so good purpooo. Of this there can hardly be a question. Tha House bill is free from the obnoxious feature ; end I am fully satisfied that no territorial bill can para the House of Representatives which •hall exolude aliens from voting, after they shall have taken the oath of intention. All lha friends of the bill agree as to this. I come now to speak, sir, of the general features of the bill. I intend to cast my vote for it; and I ray here, sir, that lam glad ol the opportunity of recording my vote in its favor. In doing so I record my vote in favoi of a great prinoiple, which is religious ly and politically right. I record my vote in fuVbr of measure for extending equal rights to all parts of this Confederacy ; in favor of ihe right of permitting southern men, not to have any advantages over the North, but to have equal advantages with them. They are entitled to il; but no more. Southern and northern property should be alike free to enter our Territories. To deny this, is to restrict the sovereignly of the States, and make them dependencies upon the General Government. If there is any one political privilege 1 claim as high and above all others, il is the uutrammeled sovereignty of my own State. Compared with this all other considerattous are subordinate and inferior. To the Gener al Government my Stale owes no natural or conventional allegiance. She is no slave to Federal power. As a party io the Federal compact, she is bound by her covenant. To tha terms and conditions of Ihe bond sha is responsible, but not one inch further. Bhc is sovereign. She is supreme. What she has conceded to the General Government is written. What she has reserved in hers.— That power is in her people. The public domain of this nation belongs, in common, to the people of all tbe States. Congress is tbe trustee ; but every inch of lha toil it vested, in fee, in the Slates. Congress may make all riMessary regula tions over the territory as property ; the jur isdiction of the same is in the people. The hardy pioneer who emigrates Irom my district, and tellies on the prairies of Kansas or Nebraska, goes there, not aa the slave of Federul power, but as a freeman. He goes there not only protected in his life and his liberty, bin in also. He renoun ces no allegiance to the good old Common wealth of Pennsylvania j hat in the journey of his adventures and his trials he is her citizen, and he walks clothed in the panoply of her power. Her constitution and her flag protect him. To him sha is the cloud by dav and the pillar ol fire by night; and un til he assumes a new position, by participa ting in the formation of a new government, his relations to his State are unchanged.— Concede that Congress may intervene, and Slate sovereignly is annihilated. It is an insslt to talk about it. Congress legislate for the freemen of a Territory ! When and where did the States clothe this body with that power ? In what section or article ol the Constitution is it written } The dqctrine is buried in the grave of the Capulets. Jack son did its funeral obsequies. The veto of the bank bill and the Maysville road bill sealed forever and encroachment pf Federal power upon the States. Abolition may plead in vain for its- restoration- il cannot be ac complished. The firat gun of the Revolution sounded the note of popular sovereignty ; tbe last one, at the gates of Mexico, reechoed tbe principle. The power of Congress to legis late on the subject of slavery in the Territo ries is imbecile. It is barren. She may make all "needful rules and regulations,' but 1 deny her jurisdiction. That belong* of right to tbe people of the Territories; not 1 to the Federal government. So far, sir, as my own action is concerned in this measure of popular sovereignty and State rights, 1 am amenable only to the one bunJred thousand people of the twelfth oou gressiunable district of Pennsylvania. My political account current is with ibern ; but, sir, as I live, I would ten thousand times rather full the advocate of popular freedom, than to be returned here upon the issue that , 1 had supported a projeot of law which aimed a blow at the constitutional power of my State, and the natural and the unaliena ble rights of her uili/ens. My Slate, sir, is no provincial establishment. She does no tribute to Coe-ar. She has a flag of her own and she has the moral and physical power to au-tain il. She ia a party to the general compact, but not a slave lo it. Standing as she does, midwap, in her geographical pos ition, she has no sympathies with fanaticism from the North, nor abstractions from the South. She is under the influences of neith er. This is why she may he called the keystone of the arch. Hui, sir, while I am a Pennnylranian my - relf, and feel all llie local pride a Pennsyl vaman should, who honors his Stale and her institutions and laws, still I claim to be an American citizen, in its broadest sense, and when southern institutions areasasiled 1 will defend them. Southern rights are as sacred as northern, and he who would trample 011 tbeto because of power and numerical strength, is without justification. There may be a difference of opiuion between nothern and southern men as to the power of Con gress orer the Territories. But all who feel an interest in this bill must see the absolute necessity of making mutual ooncessious.— Those of us from the northern Slates who are willing logo band io hand with their southern friends, in carrying oat the great measure of populsr sorereignty, should be met on mutusl ground. Mutual goodwill can only effect our common objects. South era meb my distinguish between tha rules NUMBER 14 of power applioable to States and Territories. I hold that tha lame rale applies equally to both the States and Territories. Upon that ground I take my stand. Upon that ground lam ready to meat my constituents. And on the irane as to wheaihor they are for pep, ular freedom or oentral power, I am read Ml meet them. As 1 raid before, it is to me a matter if in difference whether I am returned bare or not. If I should be, it mutt be as • Nation al Democrat. I base the proud satisfaction tfest I have stood here vindicating and sus taining (ha principle* for which our fathers fought m the Revolution—the principle of self-government in ail its length and breadth If in this there is error, ihen have I offended The question of consolidation and oeurrali ration was fully canvassed ia 1800. The al ien and sedition laws were repealed. Jeff, arson triumphed, w hen first elected as Pres ident of the United Slates, over the elder Adams ; and from that day to the present time there has been a studied ant! persever ing resistance to that principle. That is tha dociriue which we have always maintained in Pennsylvania as one of tha great funda ments! principles of Government. In a con versaiion tne other day, which I had with the honorable George M. Dallas, in the oily of Philadelphia, he remarked that tha peo ple of Pennsylvania was. somewhat alow In coming to a correct conclusion as to some of the great leading political measures of tha day, but that, during his long experience, he had never found the people of Penhsyl* vania, on a great national question, wrong, after mature deliberatiou ; and that when the conclusion was reached, it was like lha laws of the Medes and Persians, unchange able. That sturdy German population of the old Commonwealth, when they get their ni '"ds fixed on the question of popular rights and popular sovereignty, from their decision there is no appeal: there is no writ of error no certiorari lies to that court; it is firm, fixed, and established, and ever on the side of popular power. I have observed with a great deal of satis faction, that, Ihe other day, in the Senate of Pennsylvania, when the resolution* were up against Nebraska, there were but three in dividuals of itie Democratic parly who vo ted in favor of them ; and when those res ojulions went to (Jie popular .branch, tha House of Representatives, I find that, by a vote ol two to one, they refused to taka them up for consideration. That, in my opinion, determines and settles the conrso of policy that that State will pursue on tha questions involved io the bill which wa have now under discusion. I omitted lo mention, in the forepart of my remarks, the course pursued by gentle men in Congress with regard to the question of aalioual defense, and the declaration of war by this Government. There never has been, I Delieve, a necessity on tbe part of the Government for a declaration of war, but what it has been opposed by a minority in Congress- On the vote for the declaration ol war in 1812, the yeas were 79, the nays 49! When England had asserted the right to search our vessels, dishonor our flag, im press our seamen, and do other acts of vio lenoe which according to tha laws of uation* were just cause for war, there were forty nine gentlemen of this House who voted a gainst the declaration. I shall not stop to name them, or stale to what parly they be longed. When it became necessary lo pre serve our national character and dignity in reference to Ihe difficulty with the Republic of Mexico, I find, by reference, that whan the question came up, there were fourteen gentlemen who voted against the declaration of war. So it it seen that we are always di vided, whether the question be war or peace; whether it be the acquisition of territorial the organization of territorial governments, or the admission of Slates injo the Union- There is alwav* a division tif opinion in tha Congress of the United States. By a reference back lo the many acts and resolves of Congress iu regard lo these meas ures of war, and the acqusition and organ ization of territory, you will find, sir, no in stance were there has been a unanimoia vote on the part of tbe House. We cannot expect it, if Congress abail meet here for tha next one hundred years. Opposition will a gain be shown whenever these questions a rise for defending national hor.or, acquiring or organizing territory, the admission of Statas, or, in a ward, whenever and wherev er the point shall be popular power on one side and consolidation on the other. There will be an opposition strong and vindic tive, Tba joint resolution to admit Texas into the Union, approved December 29, 1845, passed tho House of Representatives on the 16th December, 1845, by a vote of yaaa 141 nays 58. Evan in this act, sir where an in diqwndsm Government sought to make an alliance, and merge her former political ex istence, there were gentlemen in CongreM who refused to accept the proposition—re spectable, 100, in point ef numbers. There has been, however, oo popular evidenoe or demonstration which would show them to havn been in the right, and tha majority in tba wrong. Bui, iir, my time haa expired, and I leave the subject, but under hope that when tho Terriiories of Kanaae and Ne braska shall be establish'*!, that the peo ple who may reaide within their reapee live limits may not be deprived, by Con *res f of the power to make their own lawa in their own way ; and aa to alavery it shall be Iter them to ear whether tfcfy will or will not tojarat# it, ~ , n
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers