ON FATHER MATHEW.

IN SENATE, DECEMBER 20, 1849.

MR. PRESIDENT, I confess that I have heard with great regret this opposition made to the adoption of that resolution. It is a very small affair; a compliment, which can not be very highly appreciated, in some of its aspects, to the reverend person who is named in that resolution. But, sir, in the little affairs of human life, whether social or national, I have found that courtesies, kindness, and small attentions are often received with more grateful feelings than those of a more substantial character. We often appreciate more the picayunes than we do the double eagles, in the currency of social and human life.

Perhaps, sir, it was hardly necessary to have presented this resolution; but it has been offered. I understand that, according to the usage of the Senate, any member may introduce into the lobby any distinguished person whom he thinks proper to introduce. I had understood that to be the rule: perhaps I am mistaken; but, be that as it may, I think, sir, that that resolution is an homage to humanity, to philanthropy, to virtue; that it is a merited tribute to a man who has achieved a great social revolution -a revolution in which there has been no bloodshed, no desolation inflicted, no tears of widows and orphans extracted; and one of the greatest which has been achieved by any of the benefactors of mankind. Sir, it is a compliment due from the Senate, small as it may be; and I put it in all seriousness, in a spirit of the most perfect kindness, to the honorable senator from Alabama, whether this pushing the subject of slavery in its collateral and remote branches upon all possible occasions that may arise during our deliberations in this body, is not impolitic, unwise, and injurious to the stability of the very institution which I have no doubt the honorable gentleman would uphold.

Sir, I have seen something in the papers upon this subject of Father Mathew's having expressed some opinions, years ago, in Ireland, upon the subject of slavery. I have seen, on the other hand, when he came to this country, and got a nearer and more accurate understanding of the state of things, he refused to lend himself to the cause of northern abolitionists; and in consequence of that refusal, incurred their severest animadversions. But, whether that had occurred or not, in reference to other causes and other motives, I submit it to the candor of the honorable senator whether

it is prudent, right, just, and proper to refuse a compliment which, I venture to say, the hearts of all mankind accord to this distinguished foreigner; a compliment no less due to him for his great services in the cause of humanity, than it is due to him as an Irish patriot.

[For Mr. Clay's speech of January 24, 1850, for the purchase of the original copy of Washington's Farewell Address, see vol. iii. of this work, p. 108.

January 29, 1850, Mr. Clay introduced into the Senate his famed Resolutions of Compromise, eight in number, and explained them by a speech of considerable length, which—both resolutions and speech-will be found in the third volume of this work.*

On the 5th and 6th of February, 1850, Mr. Clay advocated and vindicated the above-named resolutions, in a speech of great length and power, the whole of which will also be found in vol. iii., page 302.]

*Last Seven Years, chap. vi, page 114.

ON THE ADMISSION OF CALIFORNIA.

IN SENATE, FEBRUARY 14, 1850.

[THE Mexican war was alledged and believed to have been made for conquest and the extension of slavery; and the slave States were disappointed when California applied to be admitted as a free State. Her admission, therefore, excluding slavery, was opposed by the South, and strenuous efforts were made to divide California, and make a slave State out of its southern part. The great question of this long-protracted debate was, whether California should come into the Union by herself, or be put in a bill embracing other measures of general compromise. Mr. Clay was at first in favor of admitting her at once and alone; but when he discovered that it was doubtful whether such a bill would pass both Houses of Congress, he was in favor of putting the admission of California in a bill with other measures, and so reported it from the Committee of Thirteen. California, however, was finally admitted by a separate bill, after the first bill reported by the Committee of Thirteen, comprehending other measures, had failed. The following remarks of Mr. Clay were incidental, occasioned by the current of debate.]

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on referring the message of the president to the Committee on Territories, that being a standing committee.

1

Mr. CLAY. Well, if the proposition be to refer the president's message to the Committee on the Territories, I shall with great pleasure vote for the proposition. But I do not think it would be right to embrace in a general motion the question of the admission of California and all the other subjects which are treated of by the resolutions upon the table-the subject, for example, of the establishment of territorial governments, the subject of the establishment of a boundary line for Texas, and the proposition to compensate Texas for the surrender of territory. I say, sir, I do not think it would be right to confound or to combine all these subjects, and to throw them before one committee to be acted upon together. I think the subject of the admission of California ought to be kept separate and distinct, although, for one, I should have no objection, that question being

separated from the residue of the subject, that the resolutions and the rest of the propositions that are before the Senate, so far as regards those which have a kindred or common nature, should be referred at the proper time to a committee, to be acted upon together; but I think the time has not yet arrived for such a reference.

Sir, there are three or four members of Congress who have come here all the way from the Pacific with a Constitution purporting to be the Constitution of a State which is seeking to be admitted as a member of this Union. Now, sir, is it right to subject them to all the delay, the uncertainty, the procrastination which must inevitably result from the combination of all these subjects, and a reference of them to one committee, and to wait until that committee shall have adjudged the whole? I think not. I am not now arguing whether California ought or ought not to be admitted; whether she ought or ought not to be admitted with the boundary which she proposes, or with any other boundary; but I am contending that considering the circumstances under which her representation presents itself to Congress, under the circumstances that when they left their homes, perhaps, nothing on earth was further from their expectation than that there would be the slightest impediment or obstacle to their admission -and in consideration of the condition in which these gentlemen are placed who are here in attendance in the lobbies of these halls, it seems to me that we should decide, and decide as promptly as we can consistently with just and proper deliberation. I think the question of the admission of California is one which stands by itself, and that it should be kept disconnected with the other resolutions.

Entertaining these views of the matter, I shall vote for the proposition of the gentleman from Illinois for the reference to the Committee on Territories, or to any other committee to which its reference may be appropriate. *

I suppose, sir, there is nothing very novel in the idea that I am in favor of the admission of California as a State into this Union. And allow me to say to the honorable senator from Mississippi, that, if I were disposed to retaliate at all upon him in reference to the supposed change of opinion, it would be quite easy for me to tell him, that, according to his own confession to-day, he was in favor of the admission of California a year ago, when she had no Constitution; but he is opposed to her admission now, when she has come here with a Constitution in her hands, precisely in the manner in which Florida, Arkansas, I believe, and Michigan did.

Mr. FOOTE. If the honorable senator understood me as saying that I am opposed to the admission of California, he is mistaken. On the contrary, I am in favor of the admission of all that part of California lying above the line of 36° 30' as a State. But I want all the questions settled together. I said that I was in favor of her admission as a State before certain influences had operated there which have thrown her into her present unfortunate position.

Mr. CLAY. With regard to this alledged influence, I shall take up no time of the Senate during the discussion of this subject. I intend to divest myself as much as I possibly can of all party feeling.

Mr. TURNEY. I understand the honorable senator from Kentucky to say that California has presented herself now precisely as Florida did. I would inquire whether Florida had not a territorial government? and whether there was not a law of Congress authorizing the people of Florida to form a Constitution, in order to their admission into the Union as a State?

Mr. CLAY. I think not; there was no law whatever. She had a territorial government, and so had California a local government-not given to her by the government of the United States, but depending upon the laws of Mexico, prior to the cession of that territory to this country. But, in the case of Florida, and of Michigan, and I think of Arkansas—I believe in reference to two, if not all three of these States-they came into the Union without any previous act of Congress authorizing the call of a convention for the formation of a Constitution, and the decision of the Territory whether it should come in as a member of the Union or not. However, it is not a matter of much importance. I do not know that I should have risen at all had not the worthy senator from Mississippi made a sort of omnibus speech, in which he introduced all sorts of things and every kind of passenger, and myself among the number. [Laughter.] And I have risen rather to vindicate myself from the charge of inconsistency, which he has attributed to me, than for any other purpose; and if I do not do it to his satisfaction, I shall be much more surprised than he was at my advocacy of the admission of California.

But first, I declare to you, Mr. President, that I did not even know the names of the members of that committee, except that of the chairman. I do not know the opinions of any one member of that committee. I have, indeed, heard it intimated that the chairman of that committee holds an opinion somewhat different from my own. But this is not a matter into which I have inquired, or to which I attach any importance.

But, sir, I am charged with inconsistency, and inconsistency so great, that the senator from Mississippi has not been able to find language strong enough to express the astonishment which he feels. Now, sir, the worthy senator will allow me to say that I really can not govern his emotions. He is a gentleman of fine imagination and of great fancy; and if he will permit himself to be operated upon by certain emotions which produce fancies which he can find no language to express, I can not help it; it must be the fault of his own peculiar constitution. I said, sir, when I had the honor of addressing the Senate on a former occasion that I wanted a settlement of all the questions connected with the unfortunate institution which has brought upon us the dangers which now threaten this Union. I want them all settled. And, sir, there is not a syllable which the senator has read of the speech made by me on that occasion, nor in