He said of Texas, that "While she was, as a State, weak and almost powerless in resisting invasion, she was herself irresistible as an invading and a conquering power. She had but a sparse population, and neither men nor money of her own, to raise and equip an army for her own defense; but let her once raise the flag of foreign conquest-let her once proclaim a crusade against the rich States to the south of her-and in a moment volunteers would flock to her standard in crowds, from all the States in the great valley of the Mississippi-men of enterprise and valor, before whom no Mexican troops could stand for an hour. They would leave their own towns, arm themselves, and travel on their own cost, and would come up in thousands, to plant the lone star of the Texan banner on the Mexican capitol. They would drive Santa Anna to the South, and in boundless wealth of captured towns, and rifled churches, and a lazy, vicious, and luxurious priesthood, would soon enable Texas, to pay her soldiery, and redeem her State debt, and push her victorious And would not all arms to the very shores of the Pacific. this extend the bounds of Slavery? Yes, the result would be, that, before another quarter of a century, the extension of Slavery would not stop short of the Western Ocean. We had but two alternatives before us; either to receive Texas into our fraternity of States, and thus make her our own, or to leave her to conquer Mexico, and become our most dangerous and formidable rival. "To talk of restraining the people of the great Valley from emigrating to join her armies, was all in vain; and it was equally vain to calculate on their defeat by any Mexican forces, aided by England or not. They had gone once already ¿ it was they that conquered Santa Anna at San Jacinto; and three-fourths of them, after winning that glorious field, had peaceably returned to their homes. But once set before them the conquest of the rich Mexican provinces, and you might as well attempt to stop the wind. This Government might send its troops to the frontier, to turn them back, and they would over them like a herd of buffalo. Nothing could keep these booted loafers from rushing on, till they kicked the Spanish priests out of the temples they profaned." Mr. Wise proceeded to insist that a majority of the people of the United States were in favor of the annexation; at all events, he would risk it with the Democracy of the North. "Sir," said Mr. Wise, it is not only the duty of the Government to demand the liquidation of our claims, and the liberation of our citizens, but to go further, and demand the nonsurrection is raised on our borders, and let a horde of slaves, and Indians and Mexicans roll up to the boundary line of Arkan sas and Louisiana? No. It is our duty at once to say to Mexico, 'If you strike Texas, you strike us; and if England, standing by, should dare to intermeddle, and ask, Do you take part with Texas?' his prompt answer should be, Yes, and against you.' invasion of Texas. Shall we sit still while the standard of in Such, he would let gentlemen know, was the spirit of the whole people of the great valley of the West." Several other members of Congress, in the same debate, expressed similar views and desires, and they are still more frequently expressed in conversation, The Hon. Thomas W. Gilmer, a member of Congress from Virginia, and formerly a Governor of that State, numbered as one of the "Guard," and of course understood to be in the counsels of the Cabinet, in a letter bearing date the 10th day of January last, originally designed as a private and confidential letter to a friend, gives it as his deliberate opinion, after much examination and reflection, that TEXAS WILL BE ANNEXED TO THE UNION; and he enters into a specious argument, and presents a variety of reasons in favor of the measure. says, among other things: He Having acquired Louisiana and Florida, we have an interest and a frontier on the Gulf of Mexico, and along our interior to the Pacific, which will not permit us to close our eyes, or fold our arms, with indifference to the events which a few years may disclose in that quarter. We have already had one question of boundary with Texas; other questions must soon arise, under our revenue laws, and on other points of necessary intercourse, which it will be difficult to adjust. The institutions of Texas, and her relations with other governments, are yet in that condition which inclines her people (who are our own countrymen,) to unite their destinies with ours. THIS MUST BE DONE SOON, OR NOT AT ALL. There are numerous tribes of Indians along both frontiers, which can easily become the cause or the instrument of border wars." To prevent the success of this nefarious project-to preserve from such gross violation the Constitution of our country, adopted expressly "to secure the blessings of liberty," and not the perpetuation of Slavery-and to prevent the speedy and violent dissolution of the Union we invite you to unite, without distinction of party, in an immediate expression of your views on this subject, in such manner as you may deem best calculated te answer the end proposed. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, WASHINGTON, March 3rd, 1843. [NOTE.-The above address was drawn up by Hon. Seth M. Gates, of New-York, at the suggestion of John Quincy Adams, and sent to members of Congress at their residences, after the close of the session, for their signatures. Many more thar the above approved heartily of its positions and objects, and would have signed it, but for its premature publication, through mistake. Mr. Winthrop, of Mass., was one of these, with Gov. Briggs, of course; Mr. Fillmore declined signing it.] The letters of Messrs. Clay and Van Buren, taking ground against annexation, without the consent of Mexico, as an act of bad faith and aggression, which would necessarily result in war, which appeared in the spring of 1844, make slight allusions, if any, to the Slavery aspect of the case. In a later letter, Mr. Clay declared that he did not oppose annexation on account of Slavery, which he regarded as a temporary institution, which, therefore, ought not to stand in the way of a permanent acquisi tion. And, though Mr. Clay's last letter on the subject, prior to the election of 1844, reiterated and emphasized all his objections to annexation under the existing circumstances, he did not include the existence of Slavery. The defeat of Mr. Van Buren, at the Baltimore Nominating Convention-Mr. Polk being selected in his stead, by a body which had been supposed pledged to renominate the ex-President-excited considerable feeling, especially among the Democrats of New-York. A number of their leaders united in a letter, termed the "Secret Circular," advising their brethren, while they supported Polk and Dallas, to be careful to vote for candidates for Congress who would set their faces as a flint against annexation, which was signed by GEORGE P. BARKER, DAVID DUDLEY FIELD, THEODORE SEDGWICK, THOMAS W. TUCKER, ISAAC TOWNSEND. now rua None can be so blind now, as not to know that the real design and object of the South is, to "ADD NEW WEIGHT TO HER END OF THE LEVER." It was upon that ground that Mr. Webster placed his opposition, in his speech on that subject in New-York, in March, 1887. In that speech, Silas Wright, then a Senator of the United after stating that he saw insurmountable objections to the annexation of Texas, that the purchase of Louisiana States, and who, as such, had opposed the and Florida furnished no precedent for it, that the cases Tyler Treaty of Annexation, was were not parallel, and that no such policy or necessity for Governor, as the only man who could carry as led to that, required the annexation of Texas, he said: the State of New-York for Polk and Dallas. In "Gentlemen, we all see, that by whomsoever possessed, Texas is likely to be a slaveholding country; and I frankly a democratic speech at Skaneateles, N. Y., Mr. avow my entire unwillingness to do anything which shall extend the Slavery of the African race on this continent, or add Wright had recently declared that he could other slaveholding States to the Union. When I say that I never consent to Annexation on any terms regard Slavery as in itself a great moral, social, and political which would give Slavery an advantage over evil, I only use language which has been adopted by distinguished men, themselves citizens of Slaveholding States. I Freedom. This sentiment was reiterated and shall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage its further amplified in a great Convention of the Demo extension." eracy, which met at Herkimer, in the autumn of in the consummation of this grand scheme, which Eng. this year. The contest proceeded with great earnestness throughout the Free States, the supporters of Polk and of Birney (the Abolition candidate for President), fully agreeing in the assertion that Mr. Clay's position was equally favorable to Annexation with Mr. Polk's. Mr. Birney in a letter published on the eve of the Election, declared that he regarded Mr. Clay's election as more favorable to Annexation than Mr. Polk's, because, while equally inclined to fortify and extend Slavery, he possessed more ability to influence Congress in its favor. Before this time, but as yet withheld from, and unknown to, the public, Mr. Calhoun, now President Tyler's Secretary of State, and an early and powerful advocate of Annexation, had addressed to Hon. Wm. R. King, our Embassador at Paris, an official dispatch from which we make the following extracts: MR. CALHOUN TO MR. KING. } DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 12, 1844. J SIR-I have laid your dispatch, No. 1, before the President, who instructs me to make known to you that he has read it with much pleasure, especially the portion which relates to your cordial reception by the King, and his assurance of friendly feelings toward the United States. The President, in particular, highly appreciates the declaration of the King, that in no event, would any steps be taken by his government in the slightest degree hostile, or which would give to the United States just cause of complaint. It was the more gratifying from the fact, that our previous information was calculated to make the impression that the government of France was prepared to unite with Great Britain in a joint protest against the annexation of Texas, and a joint effort to induce her Government to withdraw the proposition to annex, on condition that Mexico should be made to acknowledge her independence. He is happy to infer from your dispatch that the information, so far as it relates to France, is in all probability without foundation. You did not go further than you ought, in assuring the King that the object of Annexation would be pursued with unabated vigor, and in giving your opinion that a decided majority of the American people were in its favor, and that it would certainly be annexed at no distant day. I feel confident that your anticipation will be fully realized at no distant period. Every day will tend to weaken that combination of political causes which led to the opposition of the measure, and to strengthen the conviction that it was not only expedient, but just and necessary. land hopes to accomplish through Texas, if she can defeat the Annexation, but that her interests, and those of all the Continental powers of Europe are directly and deeply opposed to it. The election of James K. Polk as President, and George M. Dallas as Vice-President, (Nov. 1844) having virtually settled, affirmatively, the question of annexing Texas, the XXVIIIth Congress commenced its second session at Washington, on the 2d of December, 1844-Mr. John Tyler being still acting President up to the end of the Congress, March 4th following. Dec. 19.-Mr. John B. Weller, (then member from Ohio) by leave, introduced a joint resolution, No. 51, providing for the annexation of Texas to the United States, which he moved to the Committee of the Whole. Mr. E. S. Hamlin, of Ohio, moved a reference of said resolve to a Committee of one from each State, with instructions to report Whether the annexation of Texas would not extend and perpetuate Slavery in the Slave States, and also, the internal Slave-trade; and whether the United States Government has any Constitutional power over Slavery in the States, either to perpetuate it there, or to do it away. The question on commitment was insisted upon, and first taken-Yeas, 109 (Democrats); Nays, 61 (Whigs); whereupon it was held that Mr. Hamlin's amendment was defeated, and the original proposition alone committed. January 10th, 1845.-Mr. John P. Hale, of New-Hampshire, (then a Democratic Representative, now a Republican Senator) proposed the following as an amendment to any act or resolve contemplating the annexation of Texas to this Union : Provided, That immediately after the question of boundary between the United States of America and Mexico shall have been definitively settled by the two Governments, and before any State formed out of the Territory of Texas shall be admitted into the Union, the said Territory of Texas shall be divided as follows, to wit: beginning at a point on the Gulf of Mexico, midway between the Northern and Southern boundaries thereof on the coast; and thence by a line running in a Northwesterly direction to the extreme boundary thereof, so as to divide the same as nearly as possible into two equal parts, and in that portion of said Territory lying South and West of the line to be run as aforesaid, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. And provided further, That this provision shall be considered as a compact between the people of the United States and the people of the said Territory, and forever remain unalterable, unless by the consent of three-fourths of the States of the Union. Mr. Hale asked a suspension of the rules, to enable him to offer it now, and have it printed and committed. Refused-Yeas, 92 (not two thirds); Nays, 81. But to descend to particulars: it certain that while England, like France, desires the independence of Texas, with the view to commercial connections, it is not less so that one of the leading motives of England for desiring it, is the hope that, through her diplomacy and influence, Negro Slavery may be abolished there, and ultimately, by consequence, in the United States and throughout the whole of this continent. That its ultimate abolition throughout the entire continent is an object ardently desired by her, we have decisive proofs in the declaration of the Earl of Aberdeen, delivered to this Department, and of which you will find a copy among the documents transmitted to Congress with the Texan treaty. That she desires its abolition in Texas, and has Yeas-All the Whigs* and most of the Demoased her influence and diplomacy to effect it there, the crats from the Free States, with Messrs. Duncan same document, with the correspondence of this Depart-L. Clinch and Alexander H. Stephens, of Georgia, ment with Mr. Packenham, also to be found among the documents, furnishes proof not less conclusive. That one of the objects of abolishing it there is to facilitate its abolition in the United States, and throughout the continent, is manifest from the declaration of the Aboli. tion party and societies both in this country and in England. In fact, there is good reason to believe that the scheme of abolishing it in Texas, with a view to its abolition in the United States, and over the continent, originated with the prominent members of the party in the United States; and was first broached by them in the (so called) World's Convention, held in London in the year 1840, and through its agency brought to the notice of the British Government. Now, I hold, not only that France can have no interest and George W. Summers, of Virginia. Nays-All the members from Slave States, except the above, with the following from Free States: ILLINOIS.-Orlando B. Ficklin, Joseph P. Hoge, Robert | aforesaid was agreed to-Yeas, 118; N«5®, Bmith-8. Total Democrats from Free States, 17. December 12th.-Mr. C. J. Ingersoll, of Penn*sylvania, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, reported a Joint Resolution for annexing Texas to the Union, which was committed and discussed in Committee of the Whole from time to time, through the next month. January 7th.-Mr. J. P. Hale presented resolves of the Legislature of New-Hampshire, thoroughly in favor of Annexation, and silent on the subject of Slavery, except as follows: Resolved, That we agree with Mr. Clay, that the reannexation of Texas will add more Free than Slave States to the Union; and that it would be unwise to refuse a permanent acquisition, which will exist as long as the globe remains, on account of a temporary institution. January 13th.-Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, moved that all further debate on this subject be closed at 2 P.M. on Thursday next. Carried-Yeas, 136; Nays, 57; (nearly all the Nays from Slave States.) January 25th.-The debate, after an exteneion of time, was at length brought to a close, and the Joint Resolution taken out of Commit tee, and reported to the House in the following form; (that portion relating to Slavery, having been added in Committee, on motion of Mr. Milton Brown, (Whig) of Tennessee: Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representa tives in Congress assembled, That Congress doth consent that the Territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form of Government, to be adopted by the people of said Republic, by deputies in Convention assembled, with the consent of the existing Government, in order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of this Union. 2. And be it further resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and with the following guaranties, to wit: First. Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this Government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments; and the Constitution thereof, with the proper evidence of its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress for its final action, on or before the 1st day of January, 1846. Second. Said State, when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States all public edifices,fortifications, barracks, ports and harbors. navy and navyyards, docks, magazines, arms, armaments, and all other property and means pe taining to the public defense, belonging to the said Republic of Texas, shall retain all the public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind which may belong to, or be due or owing said Republic; and shall also retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be applied to the payment of debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas; and the residue of said lands, after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of as said State may direct: but in no event are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the United States. Third. New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said State, be formed out of the Territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution. And such States as may be formed out of that portion of said Territory, lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union, with, or without Slavery, as the people of each State asking admission may desire; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of said Territory, north of said Missouri Compromise line, Slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited. Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, moved the previous question, which the House secondedYeas, 113; Nays, 106-and then the amendment 101. Yeas-114 Democrats, and Messrs. Milton and Duncan L. Clinch, and Alexander H. Brown, of Tennessee; James Dellet, of Alabama; Stephens, of Georgia, (4) Southern Whigs. with all from Slave States, but the four just Nays all the Whigs present from Free States named; with the following Democrats from Free States: MAINE.-Robert P. Dunlap, Hannibal Hamlin-2. NEW-YORK-Joseph H. Anderson, Charles S. Benton, Stetson-12. MICHIGAN. James B. Hunt, Robert McClelland-2. 23. Total Whigs from Free and Slave States,....78. The House then ordered the whole proposition to a third reading forthwith--Yeas, 120; Nays, 97--and passed it, Yeas, 120; Nays, 98. Yeas-all the Democrats from Slave States, and all the Democrats from Free States, except as above; with Messrs. Duncan L. Clinch, Milton Brown, James Dellet, Willoughby Newton, of Virginia, (who therefrom turned Democrat), and Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia, (now Democrat), from Slave States. Nays-all the Whigs from Free States; all those from Slave States except as above; with 23 Democrats from Free States. So the resolve passed the House, and was sent to the Senate for concurrence. In Senate, several attempts to originate action in favor of Annexation were made at this ses sion, but nothing came of them. February 24th.-The joint resolution aforesaid from the House was taken up for cousideration by 30 Yeas to 11 Nays (all Northern Whigs). On the 27th, Mr. Walker, of Wisconsin, moved to add an alternative proposition, contemplating negotiation as the means of effecting the meditated end. Mr. Foster, (Whig) of Tennessee, proposed That the State of Texas, and such other States as may be formed out of that portion of the present Territory of Texas, lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union with or without Slavery, as the people of each State, so hereafter asking admission, may desire. On which the question was taken. Yeas, (all Whigs but 3) 18; Nays, 34. Various amendments were proposed and voted down. Among them, Mr. Foster, of Tenn., moved an express stipulation that Slavery should be tolerated in all States formed out of the Territory of Texas, south of the Missouri line of 360 80'. Rejected-Yeas, 16 (Southern Whigs, and Sevier, of Arkansas); Nays, 33. Mr. Miller, of N. J., moved that the existence of Slavery be forever prohibited in the northern and northwestern part of said Territory, west of the 100th degree of latitude west from Greenwich, so as to divide, as equally as may be, the whole of the annexed country between Slaveholding and Non-Slaveholding States. Yeas, 11; all Northern Whigs, except Mr. Crittenden, Ky. Nays, 33. The vote in the Senate on the joint resolution for Annexation stood, Yeas, 26, all Demo. erats but 3; Nays, 25, (all Whigs). In the| THE WILMOT PROVISO. Texas having been annexed during the summer of 1845, in pursuance of the joint resolution of the two Houses of Congress, a portion of the United States Army, under Gen. Taylor, was, early in the spring of 1846, moved down to the east bank of the Rio Grande del Norte, claimed by Texas as her western boundary, but not so regarded by Mexico. A hostile collision ensued, resulting in war between the United States and Mexico. It was early thereafter deemed advisable that a considerable sum should be placed by Congress at the President's disposal to negotiate an advantageous Treaty of Peace and Limits with the Mexican Government. A message to this effect was submitted by President Polk to Congress, August 8th, 1846, and a bill in accordance with its suggestions laid before the House, which proceded to consider the subject in Committee of the Whole. The bill appropriating $30,000 for immediate use in negotiations with Mexico, and placing $2,000,000 more at the disposal of the President, to be employed in making peace, Mr. David Wilmot, of Pa., after consultation with other Northern Democrats, offered the following Proviso, in addition to the first section of the bill: Provided, That as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said Territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall be first duly convicted. And whereas, Congress, in the organization of a territory, established a principle worthy of imitation in all torial government, at an early period of our political his future time, forbidding the existence of Slavery in free territory; Therefore, Resolved, That in any Territory, that may be ac quired from Mexico, over which shall be established territorial governments, Slavery, or involuntary servi party shall have been duly convicted, shall be forever tude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the prohibited; and that in any act or resolution establishing such governments, a fundamental provision ought to be inserted to that effect. Mr. R. Brodhead, of Penn., moved that this resolution lie on the table. Carried: Yeas, 105; Nays, 93. Yeas-all the members from Slave States, but John W. Houston (Whig), of Delaware, with the following from Free States (all Democrats but Levin): MAINE.-Asa W. H. Clapp, Franklin Clark, Jas. S. Wiley, Hezekiah Williams-4. NEW-YORK.- Ausburn Birdsall, David S. Jackson, Frederick W. Lord, William B. Maclay-4. PENNSYLVANIA.-Richard Brodhead, Charles Brown, Lewis C. Levin, Job Man-4. Richey, William Sawyer-4. INDIANA.-Charles W. Cathcart, Thomas J. Henley, Nays-all the Whigs and a large majority of the Democrats from Free States, with John W. Houston aforesaid. This vote terminated all direct action in favor of the Wilmot Proviso for that Session. from the Select Committee to which was reJuly 18th.-In Senate, Mr. Clayton, of Del., ferred, on the 12th inst., the bill providing a territorial government for Oregon, reported a bill to establish Territorial governments for Oregon, This proviso was carried in Committee, by the (It proposed to submit all questions as to the New Mexico, and California, which was read. strong vote of eighty-three to sixty-four-only rightful existence or extent of Slavery in the three Members (Democrats) from the Free-Territories to the decision of the Supreme Court States, it was said, opposing it. (No record is of the United States.) made of individual votes in Committee of the Whole.) The bill was then reported to the House, and Mr. Rathbun, of N. Y., moved the previous question on its engrossment. Mr. Tibbatts, of Ky., moved that it do lie on the table. Defeated-Yeas, 79; (Stephen A. Douglas, John A. McClernand, John Pettit, and Robert C. Schenck, voting with the South to lay on the table ;) Nays 93; (Henry Grider and William P. Thomasson, of Ky. (Whigs) voting with the North against it. The bill was then engrossed for its third reading by Yeas 85, Nays, 80; and thus passed without further division. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table-Yeas, 71; Nays, 83. So the bill was passed and sent to the Senate, where Mr. Dixon H. Lewis, of Alabama, moved that the Proviso above cited be stricken out; on which debate arose, and Mr. John Davis of Mass., was speaking when, at noon of August 10th, the time fixed for adjournment having arrived, both Houses adjourned without day. The XXXth Congress assembled Dec. 6, 1847. Feb. 28th 1848, Mr. Putnam of New-York moved the following: Whereas, In the settlement of the difficulties pending between this country and Mexico, territory may be acquired in which Slavery does not now exist. of Conn., moved to strike out so much of said The bill was discussed through several succeeding days. On the 26th, Mr. Clarke, of R. I., moved to add to the 6th section: of the provisional government of said Territory permit Provided, however, That no law, regulation, or act ting Slavery or involuntary servitude therein shall be valid, until the same shall be approved by Congress." Rejected: Yeas, 19 [Col. Benton, and 18 Northern Freesoilers of both parties]; Nays, 33. Mr. Reverdy Johnson, of Md., moved to amend the bill by inserting: Except only, that in all cases of title to slaves, the said writs of error or appeals shall be allowed and decided by the said Supreme Court without regard to the and except, also, that a writ of error or appeal shall value of the matter, property, or title in controversy; also be allowed to the Supreme Court of the United States from the decision of the said Supreme Court created by this act, or of any judge thereof, or of the district Courts created by this act, or of any judge upon any writ of habeas corpus involving the question of per sonal freedom. Carried; Yeas, 31 (all sorts); Nays, 19 (all Southern, but Bright, Dickinson, and Hannegan). Mr. Baldwin, of Connecticut, moved an addi tional section, as follows: Sec. 87. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the attorneys for said Territories, respectively, on the complaint of any person held in involuntary servitude therein, to make application in his behalf in due form of law, to the court next thereafter to be holden in said Territory, for a writ of habeas corpus, to be directed to the person so holding such applicant in service as aforesaid, and to pursue all needful measures in his behalf; and if the decision of such court shall be adverse to the application, or if, on the return of the writ, relief shall be denied to the applicant, on the ground that he is a slave held in servitude in said Territory, said attorney shall cause an appeal to be taken therefrom, and the record of all the proceedings in the case to be transmitted to the Supreme Court of the United States as speedily as may be, and to give notice thereof to the Attorney General of the United States, who shall prosecute the same before said Court, who shall proceed to hear and determine the same at the first term thereof. Yeas, 15 (all Northern, except Benton); Nays, 31. Mr. Davis, of Mass., moved to strike out section 12, and insert as follows: Sec. 12. And be it further enacted, That so much of the sixth section of the ordinance of the 18th July, 1787, as is contained in the following words; viz. There shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,' shall be and remain in force in the Territory of Oregon. This was defeated; Yeas, 21; Nays, 33. The bill was then engrossed for a third reading; Yeas, 33; Nays, 22; as follows: Yeas For Clayton's Compromise: Messrs. Atchison, Houston, Hunter, Benton, Berrien, Johnson, La. Borland, Johnson, Ga. Breese, King, Bright, Lewis, Butler, Mangum, Calhoun, Mason, Clayton, Phelps, Davis, Miss. Rusk, Dickinson, Sebastian, Douglas, Spruance, Downs, Sturgeon, Foote, Turney, Hannegan, Westcott, Yulee-83. So the bill was engrossed, and immediately passed without a division. July 28th.-This bill reached the House, and was taken up and read twice. Mr. A. H. Stephens, of Ga., moved that the bill do lie on the table. Yeas and Nays orderd, and the motion prevailed: Yeas, 112; Nays, 97. Yeas, all the Free State Whigs, with 8 Whigs from Slave States; 20 Democrats from Free States. Nays-21 Democrats from Free States, with 76 Democrats and Whigs from Slave States. Mr. Pollock, of Pa., moved that this vote be reconsidered, and that the motion to reconsider do lie on the table; which prevailed: Yeas, 113; Nays, 96. So Mr. Clayton's project of Compromise vas defeated. The next session of the same Congress opened under very different auspices. The Mexican War had been terminated, so that none could longer be deterred from voting for Slavery Ex clusion by a fear that the prosecution of hostilities would thereby be embarrassed. General Taylor had been elected President, receiving the votes of Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Florida-a moiety of the Slave States-over Gen. Cass, now the avowed opponent of Slavery Restriction. Many of the Northern Democrats considered themselves absolved by this vote from all extra-constitutional obligations to the South, and voted accordingly. Dec. 13.-Mr. J. M. Root, of Ohio, offered the following: Resolved, That the Committee on Territories be instructed to report to this House, with as little delay as practicable, a bill or bills providing a Territorial Government for each of the Territories of New Mexico and California, and excluding Slavery therefrom. A call of the House was had, and the previous question ordered. Mr. W. P. Hall, of Mo., moved that the same do lie on the table. Lost: Yeas, 80; Nays, 106. The resolve then passed: Yeas, 108; Nays. 80, viz. : Yeas All the Whigs from Free States, and all the De mocrats, but those noted as Nays below, including the fol lowing, who had voted against the same principle at the former session : MAINE.-Asa W. H. Clapp, James S. Wiley-2. OHIO.-Thomas Richey-1. Messrs. Clark and H. Williams, of Maine, Birdsall and Maclay, of New-York, Brodhead and Mann, of Pa., Pettit, of Ind., Ficklin and McClelland, of Ill., who voted with the South at the former session-now failed to vote. Mr. Jackson, of N. Y, who then voted with the South, had been succeeded by Mr. H. Greeley, who voted with the North. Nays-All the Members voting from the Slave States, with the following from the Free States: NEW-YORK.-Henry C. Murphy-1. PENNSYLVANIA.-Charles Brown, Charles J. Ingersoll-2. ILLINOIS.-William A. Richardson-1. Total Nays from Free States-8. Mr. Robinson, of Ind., moved a reconsideration of this vote, which motion (Dec. 18), on motion of Mr. Wentworth, of Ill., was laid on the table: Yeas, 105; Nays, 83. The Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation bill having passed the House in the usual form, came up to the Senate, where it was debated several days. Feb. 21st.-Mr. Walker, of Wisc., moved an amendment, extending all the laws of the United States, so far as applicable, to the Territories acquired from Mexico. Mr. Bell, of Tenn., moved to add further seotions organizing the State of California, to be admitted into the Union on the 1st of October next. This was rejected: Yeas, 4 (Bell, Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, Davis); Nays, 39. Feb. 26th. Mr. Dayton, of N. J., moved the the President be vested with power to provid a suitable temporary government for the T ritories. Rejected: Yeas, 8; Nays, 47. |