1ST SESS.]

Resolved, That the message of the President this day received, on the subject of admitting California as a State into the Union, with the accompanying documents, be referred to a special committee of fifteen, to be chosen by ballot, whose duty it shall be to consider the same, and also to take into consideration the various propositions now before the Senate relating to the same subject, in connection with the question of domestic slavery, in all its various bearings, and to report, if they find it practicable to do so, a plan for the definitive settlement of the present unhappy controversy, and rescue from impending perils the sacred Union itself.

On motion, the Senate adjourned.

The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being a series of resolutions some time since submitted by Mr. CLAY. Mr. Downs resumed and concluded the speech which he commenced yesterday.

Mr. MILLER next obtained the floor; but as it was too late to proceed to-day, and as the Senator from Alabama was entitled to the floor on another object-the reference of the President's message accompanying the constitution of the State of California-he moved that the further consideration of this subject be postponed to Thursday next; which was agreed to.

On motion, the Senate then proceeded to the consideration of Executive business; and, after some time, the doors were reopened, and The Senate adjourned.

THURSDAY, February 21.

The Compromise.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolutions some time since offered by Mr. CLAY.

Mr. MILLER resumed and concluded the speech which he commenced on Thursday last. Mr. RUSK. As there is a special order for to-morrow, I will move that these resolutions be postponed until Wednesday.

Mr. WALKER. I would ask if it is the intention of the honorable Senator to address the Senate upon the resolutions on that day?

[FEBRUARY, 1850.

Mr. Rusk. That is my object. The motion was agreed to, and the resolutions were accordingly postponed until Wednesday.

Committee to Prepare a Compromise. Mr. FOOTE. I now ask permission, sir, to renew the motion which I made this morning for the appointment of a committee of thirteen, with certain instructions, for the purpose of maturing a scheme of compromise for the adjustment of all pending questions growing out of the subject of slavery. I will state that the resolution which I have presented for this purpose has been carefully drawn; and that it will not interfere in the least degree with the propositions that have been or may be submitted by any other gentleman. If this ferred, the resolutions of the Senator from resolution be adopted and the questions reKentucky will still be before the Senate, as

the motion of the Senator from Missouri to

admission of California to the Committee on

refer the President's message in relation to the Territories, will also be for consideration. My it go on for a few days, and in the mean time object is not to interfere with debate, but to let I hope the committee will be accorded by the

Senate. I have an abiding and entire confidence that the thirteen gentlemen selected to serve upon that committee will arrange some scheme for the permanent adjustment of those questions that now agitate the country. And, sir, if this be not speedily done, much more serious consequences than those which we have yet realized will inevitably ensue. I do hope that under the circumstances, honorable Senators, if they have not very good reasons for voting against my resolution, will sustain it.

Mr. CLEMENS. How will this committee be constituted?

Mr. FOOTE. The motion is to select by ballot six Senators from the slaveholding and six from the free States; and the thirteenth member to be chosen by the twelve thus elected; and the duty of the committee is prescribed in the paper which I have submitted to the Senate.

WEDNESDAY, February 27.
The Compromise.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolutions submitted by Mr. CLAY, in relation to the adjustment of the questions in controversy between the States of the Union arising out of the institution of slavery.

Mr. BENTON. Mr. President: It has been affirmed and denied on this floor that slavery was abolished in Mexico. I am one of those who affirm its abolition; and I propose now to read some passages from Mexican law, for the purpose of supporting my opinion. In doing this, I shall have recourse to authentic law publications in Mexico, and shall produce the laws on which I rely, both in the original language and

in an English translation. I begin with the decree of the President Guerrera in 1829, and read from a book which was printed in the city of Mexico in the year 1838, and which is the eleventh volume of the laws of Mexico, officially published under the orders of the Supreme Government. I will read the title-page to show its authentic and official character. This is it: "Recopilacion de leyes, decretos, bandos, reglamentos, circulares, y providencias de los supremos poderes y otras autoridades de la republica Mexicana. Formada de orden del Supremo Gobierno por al lic. Basilio Jose Arrillaga."

In English this title reads thus:

"Collection of laws, decrees, proclamations, regulations, circulars, and official orders of the supreme powers, and other authorities of the Mexican Republic, made by order of the Supreme Government by the lawyer Basilio José Arrillaga."

From this title it will be seen that this volume, from which I propose to read the decree of 1829, is not only authentic and official, but that it is the work of a lawyer acting under the orders of the Supreme Government, and supposed to know what were and what were not the laws of his country. With this exposi- | tion of the character of the work, and its title to credit, I proceed to read the decree. It stands thus on page 213, under the mouth of September, 1829:

"Dia 15.—Decreto del Gobierno en virtud de fa

cultades estraordinarias.

[31ST CONG,

of that year passed a law in relation to them. This law classified the whole of these acts, annulled some classes, confirmed others, and reserved some for the future revision of the General Congress. This latter class appears to have comprehended the decree of the 15th September, 1829, in relation to the abolition of slavery, and was in these words:

"9. Todas las leyes, decretos, reglamentos, ordenes y providencias que en virtud de las citadas facultades extraordinarias expidió el gobierno, y son del resorte del poder legislativo, se sujetan á la calificacion del Congreso General, quedando desde ahora sin valor, hasta su revision por las camaras." -p. 38.

In English: "9. All the laws, decrees, regulations, orders, and instructions issued by the Government in virtue of its extraordinary powers, and which are of legislative cognizance, will be subject to the qualification of the General Congress, remaining from this time without force until their revision by the chambers."

This act is cautiously drawn. It does not annul the decree of the 15th of September; it does not confirm it; it admits its validity up to that time, but suspends it until the General Congress should act upon it. This action took place-took place in April, 1837-and I will now read the act which was then passed. It is in the same authentic collection of the laws of Mexico-Arrillaga's collection-from which of that collection. At page 270 of this volI have already read, and is volume thirteenth ume, under date of April 5th, 1837, we find this act of the General Congress:

"Dia 5.—Queda abolida la esclavitud en la republica sin excepcion alguna.

In English:

“Day 15.-Decree of the Government in virtue of extraordinary powers.

This is the decree of Guerrera, the validity of which has been disputed, and not without reason, if nothing further had been done. It was a decree, and not a law; and a decree upon a legislative subject. It was an executive decree upon a matter of legislation, and its validity was questioned at the time. Two years afterwards (that is to say, in the year 1831) the General Congress occupied itself with reviewing all the acts of the President Guerrera in virtue of the extraordinary powers conferred upon him, and on the 15th of February

"1. Slavery is abolished, without any exception, in the whole Republic. 2. The masters of slaves manumitted by the present law, or by the decree of the 15th of September, 1829, (Recopilacion of value, (del interes de ellos,) according to the estimate that month, p. 213,) shall be indemnified for their which shall be made of their personal qualities; to which effect there shall be named a competent person (un perito) by the commissary general, or whoever occupies his place, and another by the master; and in case of disagreement a third, who shall be named by the respective constitutional

alcalde, without any recourse from this determination. The indemnification of which this article speaks, shall not have operation with respect to those colonists of Texas, who may have taken part in the revolution of that department. (Circulated the same day by the Minister of the Interior, and published in proclamation of the 7th.)"

This act of the General Congress is a full confirmation of the Presidential decree of September, 1829, and that without reference to the meaning of the verb "queda," twice used, and which signifies literally "remains." The literal translation would be, "slavery remains abolished," &c., which would imply that it had been abolished before. I translate it idiomati- | cally, and as equivalent to "is;" but consider it of no importance here, as the law expressly confirms the abolition decree of Guerrera.

Thus far we have a decree, disputed, abolishing slavery in Mexico, and a law, not disputable, confirming that decree; and here I might stop; but the case requires me to go on, and I produce other law, and still higher than that which I have quoted. I allude to the Constitution of the Republic of Mexico of the year 1843. I have a copy of the Mexican constitution of that year-an authentic copy-printed under the license which the law requires. For, to avoid errors in the editions of that fundamental law, it is forbid, by law, to be reprinted except by the permission of the Supreme Government or of the General Congress. This copy was printed in the city of Mexico the 12th day of June, 1843-the day of the signature and promulgation of the constitution-and bears its authorization upon its title page. I consider it authentic, and produce it as such; and in article 9, title 2, of this constitution, and under the head which treats of the rights of the inhabitants of the Republic, and at the head of the enumeration of those rights, stands this declaration :

"1. Ninguno es esclavo en el territorio de la nacion, y el que se introduzca se considerarà en la clase de libre, quedando bajo la proteccion de las leyes."

In English: "1. No one is slave in the territory of the nation, and any introducted shall be considered free, and shall be under the protection of

the laws."

This is the declaration of the Constitution of Mexico, and applies both to the present and the future. It declares that there are no slaves in the territory of the nation, and if any are brought in they shall be free. This is surely enough-enough to satisfy all minds, that slavery has been abolished in Mexico, and that there is not the least ground for fearing, or hoping, that it can ever exist in California or New Mexico by virtue of Mexican law. It is enough, I think; but I have more authority yet, and will produce it, though a work of supererogation. For this is a case to multiply authorities until doubt is extinguished-to heap up and pile up-to put Pelion upon Ossauntil all beneath is crushed into atoms and VOL. XVI.-26

[FEBRUARY, 1850.

expunged from view. Behold this formidable quarto! [holding up a large book.] It is a Spanish law dictionary, printed in Madrid, reprinted in Mexico, gone through several editions in each country, and authority in both. It is the law dictionary of Escriche in Spain, and of San Miguel in Mexico; and here is one, and there is the other. The Spanish edition is full upon the subject of slaves and slavery: the Mexican reprint of the same work (1837) omits the definitions, and says, under the head "esclavitud," it is not necessary to occupy a couple of columns with slavery and the slave trade-that the trade was abolished by treaty with Great Britain, and slavery itself by the laws of the republic-and then speaks of Guerrera's decree of 1829, and of the confirmatory act of 1837, in these words:

"El decreto de 15 de Setiembre de 1829, dió libertad á los esclavos que ya existen en la república, bajo indemnizacion à sus duenos ó poseedores para que no apareciese atacada la propiedad: y últimamente en Abril de 1837, se ha publicada nueva ley sobre abolicion de la esclavitud."

In English: "The deeree of the 15th of September, 1829, gave liberty to the slaves then in the republic, with indemnity to their owners or possess ors, that property might not seem to be attacked: and finally, in April, 1837, a new law had been published on the abolition of slavery."

This is the historical account of the abolition of slavery in Mexico. The reprint was in the year 1837, and therefore could not mention the constitutional declaration of 1843. The law dictionary of Escriche, and its reprint with notes and additions by San Miguel, to adapt it to the Mexican jurisprudence, are of as high authority in Spain, and in the American States of Spanish origin, as the law dictionary of Jacob is with us.

This is

I quote no more upon this head. I think every one must see that slavery was abolished throughout the Mexican territory before the cession of California and New Mexico to the United States, and that slavery cannot exist there now by virtue of Mexican law. as far as I propose to go upon that point at present. I limit myself to showing its abolishment, by Mexican law, before we acquired the countries; and that is enough, in my opinion, to show the Wilmot proviso, in relation to these countries, to be a thing of nothing-an empty provision-a cloud without rain-unless it be a rain of blood.

But there is another view of this point which I mean to touch, and that is, to show that African slavery never did exist in Mexico in the form that it now exists in any State of this Union; that there were differences in the Mexican law while it existed, and that to such a degree that it nearly prevented slavery in Mexico; and that, if that law was now in full force in New Mexico and California, not a single slaveholder in any State of this Union would carry a slave there except to set him free. These differences went to the facilities

and the rights of manumission, and arose from the opposite policy of the two countries; in the United States to discourage emancipation, in Mexico to promote it. To show these differences I will read from Humboldt's essay on New Spain, and from the law dictionary of Escriche. I use Humboldt first, and read from the Paris, quarto edition, of 1808:

"D'ailleurs, les esclaves, qui heureusement se trouvent en très-petit nombre au Mexique, y sont, comme dans toutes les possessions espagnoles, un peu plus protégé par les lois que les nègres qui habitent les colonies des autres nations européenes. Ces lois sont toujours interprétées en faveur de la liberté. Le Gouvernement désire voir augmenter le nombre des affranchis. Un esclave qui par son industrie, s'est procuré quelque argent, peut forcer son maître de l'affranchir en lui payant la somme modique de 1,500 ou 2,000 livres. La liberté ne sauroit être refusée au nègre sous prétexte qu'il a couté le triple en l'acherant, ou qu'il possède un talent particulier pour exercer un métier lucratif. Un esclave qui a été cruellement maltraité, acquiert par la même son affranchisement d'après la loi, si toutesfois le juge embrasse la cause de l'opprimé. On concoit que cette loi bienfaisante doit être bien souvent éludée. J'ai vu cependant à Mexique même, au mois de juillet, 1803, l'example de deux négresses à qui le magistrat qui fait les fonctions d'alcalde du corte, donna la liberté, parceque leur maîtresse, une dame native des îles, les avoit couvertes de blesseures faites avec des ciseaux, des épingles et des canifs."-Page 133-'4.

"Le royaume de la Nouvelle Espagne est, de toutes les colonies des Européens sous la zone torride, celle dans la quelle il y a le moins de nègres. On peut presque dire qu'il n'y a point d'esclaves. On parcourt toute la ville de Mexico sans trouver un visage noir. Le service d'aucune maison ne s'y fait avec des esclaves. Sous ce point de vue surtout, le Mexique offre un contraste bien grand avec la Havane, avec Lima et Caraccas."-Page 130.

In English: "Moreover, the slaves, who happily find themselves in very small number in Mexico, are there, as in all the Spanish possessions, a little more protected by the laws than the negroes who inhabit the colonies of other European nations. The laws are always interpreted in favor of liberty. The Government desires to see the number of enfranchised augmented. A slave who, by his industry, may have procured money, can compel his master to enfranchise him by paying him the moderate sum of 1,500 or 2,000 livres.* Liberty cannot be refused a negro under the pretext that he cost the triple in purchasing him, or that he possesses a special talent for exercising a lucrative trade. A slave who has been cruelly maltreated acquires thereby his enfranchisement according to the law, provided always the judge embraces the cause of the oppressed. One may conceive that this beneficent law is often eluded. I saw, nevertheless, in Mexico itself, in the month of July, 1803, the example of two negresses to whom the magistrate who exercised the functions of alcalde of the court, gave their liberty, because their mistress, a native woman of the islands, had covered them with wounds made with scissors, pins, and knives."Page 133-'4.

* $300 to $400.

[31ST CONG. "The kingdom of New Spain is, of all the colonies of the Europeans under the torrid zone, that in which there are the fewest negroes; one may almost say that there are no slaves. One may go all over the city of Mexico without meeting a black this point of view, above all, Mexico offers a great contrast with Havana, with Lima, and Caraccas."Page 130.

face, No house is there served with slaves. Under

I will now read from Escriche, who, as a law writer, is more full and precise, and shows such a multitude of cases in which a slave could

easily obtain or actually force his freedom, that, under such laws, in a country where could hold them. I read from the dictionary, slaves were of any value, no man would or under the words, Esclavo, Esclavitud:

"El señor hace suyo todo cuanto ganan y adquieren por cualquier titulo sus esclavos; y si los pusiere al frente de tienda, nave ú otro cualquiera establecimiento, queda obligado á guardar y cumplir los contratos que hicieren, como si él mismo hubiese intervenido en ellos."-Ley 7, tit. 21, Part. 4.

"El señor que fuere mayor de catorce años puede dar libertad á su esclavo en testamento; y el que fuere mayor de veinte puede darsela en instrumento, ó ante el juez, ó bien ante amigos, con asistencia de cinco testigos; mas el minor de veinte y mayor de diez y siete puede darla ante el juez con otorgamiento de su curador, á su hijo habido en esclava, á su padre, madre, hermano y maestro, á su nodriga, á la persona que le hubiere criado, á la que hubiese criado el mismo, y á su hermano de leche, al siervo que le hubiese librado de muerte ó de deshonra, al que quisiere hacer administrador extrajudicial de sus cosas siendo de diez y siete años, y á la esclava con quien tratare de casarse."-Ley 1, tit. 22, Part. 4.

"Si dos ó mas señores tuvieren un esclavo, puede libertarlo cualquiera de ellos, dando á los otros el justo precio de la parte que á cada uno correspondiente; y aun puede comprarlo un tercero con objeto de darle libertad."-Ley 2, tit. 22, Part. 4.

"Merece la libertad el esclavo en los cuatro casos siguientes: 1°. Si delatase al raptor ó forzador de muger virgen: 2°. Si descubriese al que hace moneda falsa: 3°. Si descubriese al gefe militar que abandonó su puesto: 4°. Si acusare al homicida de su señor, ó vengare su muerte, ó descubriere traicion contra al rey ó el reino. En los tres primeros casos debe el rey dar el precio de esclavo á su dueño."-Ley 3, tit. 23, Part. 4.

"Si el dueño prostituyere públicamente á su esclava, queda esta libre por el mismo hecho, y no puede aquel recobrar ni tener derécho alguno sobre ella."-Ley 4, tit. 22, Part. 4.

"Adquiere par fin libertad el esclavo, por el matrimonio que contrajere con persona libre, ó por las órdenes sagradas que recibiere, con noticia y consentimiento de su señor; como tambien por la prescripcion, cuando con buena fé se tratare como libre por diez años en la tierra donde mora su señor ó por veinte en otra, ó sin buena fé por espacio de treinta."-Leyes 5, 6, and 7, tit. 22, Part. 4.

In English: "The master makes his own whatever his slaves gain and acquire, by whatever title; and if he puts them at the head of a shop, stall, or