2D SESS.] DEBATES OF CONGRESS. The Three Million Bill. exerted to induce Mexico to enter into a satisfactory arrangement with us. I cannot doubt that, under the influence of these powerful causes, with a little forbearance and prudence on our part, all the causes of difference between the two countries would, ere this, have been settled by a treaty satisfactory to both. [FEBRUARY, 1847. It is true Mexico claimed the whole of Texas; but it is equally true that she recognized the difference, and showed a disposition to act upon it, between the country known as Texas proper and the country between it and the Del Norte. It is also true that we and Texas recognized the same difference, and that both regarded the An opposite course was, however, unfor- boundary as unsettled, as the resolution of antunately taken; both negotiations were pushed nexation, which provides that the boundary at the same time, and that with Mexico, with between Texas and Mexico shall be determinas much zeal, and as strong a pressure, as that ed by the United States, clearly shows. It with England. The then President of the is worthy of remark in this connection, that republic of Mexico (Herrera) was friendly to this provision in the joint resolution is underthe United States, and anxiously disposed, on stood to have been inserted in consequence of that account, as well as others, to settle the the ground taken at the preceding session by differences with us. Acting under these feel- the Senator from Missouri on the discussion of ings, he acceded to the proposition to receive a the treaty, that the Nueces was the western commissioner, without duly reflecting, as the boundary of Texas, and that to extend that events proved, on these great impediments in boundary to the Rio del Norte would take in the minds of the Mexicans against treating with part of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, and New Mexico. us. The result was as might have been anti- What, then, ought to have been the course of cipated. Paredes took advantage of the error, the Executive after annexation under this resoand hurled Herrera from power; and the effect lution? The very one which they at first purof this premature attempt at opening negotia- sued,-to restrict the position of our troops to tion, was to overthrow a friend and place an the country actually occupied by Texas at the enemy in power, deeply committed against period of annexation. All beyond, as far as settling the differences between the two coun- the Executive was concerned, ought to have tries, and thereby-as ought to have been fore-been regarded as subject to the provisions of seen-greatly to increase the difficulty of any future settlement of the questions. What followed from this unfortunate step, until it ended in war between the two countries, has been so clearly traced by the Senator from Maine, as to supersede the necessity of my touching upon it. The overlooking of the intimate connection of these two questions was not only the first link in that series of causes which finally termi. nated in this war, but it came near preventing the settlement of the Oregon question. Had the action of Congress, which finally led to the settlement of the Oregon question, been delayed until it was known that skirmishes had taken place between our forces and the Mexicans on the Rio Grande, (but a short period,) there is every reason to believe the Oregon question would not have been closed. I speak upon high authority, the escape was a narrow one. Fortunately, the British Government promptly acted upon the notice, and tendered a proposition to our Minister on which the settlement was finally made, which he received and forwarded to our Government but a few days before news was received in England of the skirmishes on the Rio Grande. But while they fortunately occurred too late to prevent a settlement of the Oregon question, they unfortunately occurred too soon to preserve peace with Mexico. But if the policy which the Administration first adopted after annexation had been pursued, to occupy the frontier of Texas with our military forces to the extent of country which she held at the time of annexation, and no further, there is every reason to believe that on the settlement of the Oregon question the peace of the two countries would have been preserved. the resolutions, which authorized the Govern- then in session, and in whom the right of establishing the boundary and declaring war was clearly invested? Had that course been adopted, I greatly mistake if the sense of this body would not have been decidedly opposed to taking any step which would have involved the two countries in war. Indeed, I feel a strong conviction, that if the Senate had been left free to decide on the question, not onethird of the body would have been found in favor of war. As it was, a large majority felt themselves compelled, as they believed, to vote for the bill recognizing the existence of war, in order to raise the supplies of men and money necessary to rescue the army under General Taylor, on the Del Norte, from the dangers to which it was exposed. But to bring the matter home, the Senator himself is in no small degree responsible for the war. I intend no attack on him. I have made none, and will make none. The relations between him and myself, personal and political, have long been such, that self-respect and a sense of propriety forbid my alluding to him, except when unavoidable, and then in a courteous manner; and I now allude to his course only because it is necessary to explain mine, and the motives which governed me on the occasion. The Senate will remember, that when the President's Message was received recommending Congress to recognize that a war existed between us and Mexico, and to raise the necessary means for its prosecution, the Senator from Mississippi, whose seat is immediately on my right, but who is now absent, (Mr. SPEIGHT,) moved to print twenty thousand copies of the Message and documents. The scene was a solemn one, and what occurred will long be remembered by the members of the body. I rose and objected; and said that we were on the eve of great events, and expressed my hope that we would proceed calmly and deliberately. I suggested that the printing of so large a number of copies would be construed into an endorsement of the Message; adding, that I was unwilling either to endorse or condemn, until the Message and documents were printed, and carefully perused by me. A debate ensued, and the Journals of the Senate will show what took place. The Senator from Missouri was the individual who made the discreet and appropriate motion to separate the recommendations of the Message into two parts, and refer that which related to recognizing the existence of war to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and that which related to the raising of men and supplies, to the Committee on Military Affairs, of which he was chairman. The latter, it was expected, would report immediate measures for the support of General Taylor. I seconded the motion, and it was carried by a large majority. I saw in it that which gave me hope, and that I should be able to effect the object I had in view, and which I will hereafter explain. [29TH CONG, The House of Representatives acted with much more precipitancy; it passed a bill the very day the Message was received, recognizing the existence of the war, and providing means for its prosecution. It was late in the evening when it passed the House, and I am of the impression that the Senate had adjourned; and it was not reported to it that day; but be that as it may, the next day the Senator, as chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, reported the bill to the Senate as it came from the House, with both provisions in it; directly contrary to the order of the Senate, made on his own motion, to refer the part of the Message relating to the recognition of war to the Committee on Foreign Relations. To that, and the fact that a caucus had been held of the party which agreed to sustain the report, may be traced the precipitate (to use no stronger word) action of the Senate, and the recognition of the war. It emphatically made the war. Had the order of the Senate been respected-had the Senator from Missouri, in conformity with it, and as he was in duty bound to do, moved to strike out all that related to the recognition of the war, and referred it to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and confined his report to raising the necessary means of rescuing General Taylor and his army from the pressing dangers which surrounded them, the possibility is, that the war might have been averted, and the two countries at this day have been at peace. Sir, I say possibility, because, even then, after the skirmishes between our forces had occurred, I did not despair of escaping war, if sufficient firmness and prudence were used on the part of this body. I had deeply reflected on the subject in advance, and great as were the difficulties, I still saw a gleam of hope. The intelligence of the skirmishes on the Rio Grande was received here on Saturday. I at once saw the danger, and turned my mind to the subject. I anticipated that a Message would be received on Monday from the Executive, and formed not an incorrect opinion as to what would be its character. Casting my eyes over the whole, with a view of avoiding war, I came to the conclusion in my own mind, what course was best to effect that object. Next morning I communicated the conclusions to which I had come to two of my colleagues, who were boarding with me; I said to them, that there was but one way of escaping war, but I am not certain that it would be successful. It will, however, place us in the chapter of accidents, and thereby afford a possibility of escape. I was asked what it was, and replied, that it depended on separating the question of war from that which relates to the rescuing of General Taylor and his forces. Let the means necessary for the latter be immediately granted, but let time be taken for due and deliberate consideration of the former. Had that been done. it was my intention to throw my whole weight against the immediate declaration or recognition of war; treating what had occurred 2D SESS.] DEBATES OF CONGRESS. The Three Million Bill. as mere hostilities between the two armies, without authority of the Congress-the warmaking power of either Government. We had not a particle of evidence then, or even now, that the Republic of Mexico had made war against the United States. Indeed, we are in the anomalous condition of the two countries being at war during and almost an entire year, without either having declared it, although the constitutions of both expressly provide that Congress shall declare war. Instead, then, of recognizing war, I would have taken the very opposite ground-that what had occurred was mere hostilities, and not war, as the Congress of Mexico had not author ized it. To provide for the contingency of the Congress of Mexico approving of what had occurred, and refusing to treat for the settlement of our difficulties, I would have advised the raising of ample provisional force, to be collected at some convenient and healthy point, where they could be trained during the interval, and be fully prepared to meet such decision; but even in case such decision should be made, instead of advising a formal declaration of war, I would have advised, as General Jackson recommended, giving authority to the Executive to make reprisals for seizing and holding such portion of the Mexican territory as would afford ample indemnity, to be retained until the differences between the two countries were settled; but, in the mean time, would have taken measures to repel the attacks made upon our army by the Mexican forces, and to drive them far beyond the limits of our borders. MONDAY, March 1. [MARCH, 1847. Three Million Bill-Mr. Upham's Amend- Mr. UPHAM rose and moved an amendment, SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any territory which shall hereafter be acquired or the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall be annexed to the United States, otherwise than in have been duly convicted: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed out of said territory to the person claiming his or her labor or service." Mr. UPHAM sustained his amendment in substance as follows: I will, sir, refer to the proceedings of the Congress of the Confederation in 1784. On the 9th of April, 1784, Congress took into consideration the report of a committee consisting of Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Chase of Maryland, and Mr. Howell of Rhode Island, to whom was recommitted their report of a plan for a temporary government of the western territory. The plan reported contained a clause prohibiting slavery in the territory after the year 1800. Here is the clause, and the vote upon it: New Hampshire. Massachusetts... Rhode Island.... 66 "IN CONGRESS OF THE CONFEDERATION, April 19, 1784. Had this course been pursued, we should "That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, have had all the glory and reputation of the two brilliant victories at Palo Alto and Resaca there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary serde la Palma without being involved in the pres-vitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in ent indefinite and expensive war waged against the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall Mexico. We would also have had the advan- have been convicted to have been personally ⚫tage of the chapter of accidents-of Mexico dis-guilty." And on the question, Shall the words avowing hostilities, and indemnifying our citi- moved to be struck out stand? The yeas and nays zens-either from a sense of weakness, or of being required by Mr. Howell: returning justice on her part, or from the influence of other powers, which have an interest in preserving peace, from their commercial or other relations with her, and thereby save a resort to arms on our part. But, at all events, failing in that, we would have avoided, by rethe sorting to reprisals, the enormous expenses, sacrifice of men and money, and the disasters I have now to which the war has exposed us. met, and, I trust, successfully repelled, all the charges made by the Senator from Missouri, except those relating to the Missouri compromise, and the abolition question at that period, for which I am in no ways responsible. I was not then in Congress. I filled the office of Secretary of War at the time, and had no agency or control over it. His charges are as light as air-old and stale, without even plausibility, and I have not the slightest fear of their having any weight, either here or in the community. Connecticut...... Mr. Foster, ay. Ay. Ay. Mr. Patridge, ay. Mr. Ellery, ay. Ay. Mr. Howell, ay. Mr. Sherman, ay. Ay.. Mr. Wadsworth, ay. Mr. De Witt, ay. Ay. North Carolina.. Mr. Speight, no. Pennsylvania..... Maryland......... Virginia........ "So the question was lost, and the words were stricken out." It required the vote of seven States to carry a proposition in the affirmative, so the words were stricken out. It will be perceived, sir, by looking at the vote, that seven States voted aye, but there is an asterisk put down to the State of New Jersey, and the aye of Mr. Dick, it appears, was not counted. I do not know for what reason it was rejected, but, probably, because the whole delegation from the State was not present. Only three States voted to reject the article-Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. Mr. Jefferson voted to retain it, but Mr. Hardy and Mr. Mercer voted to reject it. North Carolina was divided, and her vote was lost. So the vote stands six States for retaining the article, and three for rejecting it. I have introduced these proceedings, sir, for the purpose of showing, that immediately after the peace of 1783, the people regarded slavery as a great evil, and desired to prohibit it in all the territories belonging to the Confederation.. Delaware...... Virginia........ North Carolina.. South Carolina... Mr. Gayson, ay. Mr. R. H. Lee, ay. Georgia........... Mr. Pierce, ay. [29TH CONG Ay. "So it was resolved in the affirmative." ticle. There was but one vote against it, and Every State present voted to retain the arthat was from the State of New York. This ordinance repealed the ordinance of 1784, and forever prohibited slavery in all the territories then belonging to the Confederacy. The slave States, at that time, had no desire to see slavery established in any part of the country where it did not then exist. Universal emancipation was the wish and the prayer of the ablest and the wisest statesmen of the Confederacy. better, and more time had remained to us, it Mr. WEBSTER said: If my health had been But to proceed: In 1787, the attention of bill before it, and also on several topics with was my purpose to address the Senate on the the Congress of the Confederation was again which it is connected. This purpose, under directed to the subject of slavery in the North-existing circumstances, I must necessarily forewest Territory, and an ordinance for the governmeut of the territory, prohibiting slavery, was reported by a committee, consisting of Mr. Carrington of Virginia, Mr. Dane of Massachusetts, Mr. R. H. Lee of Virginia, Mr. McKean of South Carolina, and Mr. Smith of New York. Here, sir, is the article prohibiting slavery, and the vote upon it: go. The true origin of the war with Mexico, and the motives and purposes for which it was originally commenced, however ably discussed already, are subjects not yet exhausted. I have been particularly desirous of examining the them. I am greatly deceived, Mr. President, if we shall not ere long see facts coming to the light, and circumstances found coinciding and concurring, which shall fix on the Executive Government a more definite and distinct pur"According to order, the ordinance for the Gov-pose, intended to be effected with the co-operaernment of the territory of the United States, north-west of the river Ohio, was read a third time, and passed, as follows: "IN CONGRESS OF THE CONFEDERATION. * * * "ART. 6. 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: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid. "Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the resolutions of the 23d of April, 1784, relative to the subject of this ordinance, be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and declared null and void. Done, &c. "On passing the above ordinance, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. Yates: Massachusetts... Mr. Dane, ay. Ay. Ay. New York........ Mr. Haring, ay. Mr. Yates, no. tion of others, in bringing on hostilities with Mexico, than has as yet been clearly developed or fully understood. Sir, we are in the midst of a war, not waged at home in defence of our soil, but waged a thousand miles off, and in the heart of the teritories of another Government. Of that war no one yet sees the end, and no one counts the cost. It is not denied that this war is now prosecuted for the acquisition of territory; at least if any deny it, others admit it, and all know it to be true. this purpose to exist, seven or eight of the free Under these circumstances, and plainly seeing States, comprising some of the largest, have remonstrated against the prosecution of the war for such a purpose, in language suited to express their meaning. These remonstrances come here with the distinct and precise object of dissuading us from the further prosecution of the war for the acquisition of territory by conquest. Before territory is actually obtained, and its future character fixed, they beseech us to give up an object so full of danger. One and all, they protest against the extension of slave territory; one and all, they regard it DEBATES OF CONGRESS. But here, sir, I cannot but pause. I am arrested by the occurrences of this night which, I confess, fill me with alarm. They are ominous, portentous. Votes which have been just passed by majorities here, cannot fail to arrest public attention. Every patriotic American, every man who wishes to preserve the constitution, ought to ponder them well. I heard, sir, the honorable member from New York, (Mr. Dix,) and with a great part of his remarks I agreed; I thought they must lead to some useful result. But, then, what does he come to, after all? He is for acquiring territory under the Wilmot proviso; but, at any rate, he is for acquiring territory. He will not vote against all territory to form new States, though he is willing to say they ought not to be slave States. Other gentlemen of his party, from the Northern and Eastern States, vote in the same way and with the same view. This is called "the policy of the Northern Democracy." I so denominate the party only because it so denominates itself. A gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. BUTLER,) if I understood him rightly, said he wanted no new territory: all he desired was equality, and no exclusion; he wished the South to be saved from any thing derogatory; and yet he does not vote against the acquisition of territory. Nor do other Senators from Southern States. They are, therefore, in general, in favor of new territory and new States being slave States. This is the policy of the Southern Democracy. Both parties agree, therefore, to carry on the war for territory, though it be not decided now whether the character of new acquired territory shall be that of freedom or of slavery. This point they are willing to leave for future agitation" Northern Democracy" helped to out-vote us, and future controversy. Gentlemen who are in favor of the Wilmot proviso are ready, nevertheless, to vote for this bill; though that proviso be struck out. The gentleman from New York is ready for that, and his Northern and Eastern friends, who sit round him here in the Senate, are as ready as he is. They all demand acquisition, and maintain the war for that pur to defeat us, to overwhelm us. And they accomplished their purpose. Nay, more. The party in the North which calls itself, by way of distinction and eminence, the "Liberty Party," opposed, with all its force, the election of the Whig candidate in 1844, when it had the power of assisting in and securing the election of that candidate, and of preventing Mr. Polk's |