MR. CLAY. Is it not improper for the private intercourse which may take place from time to time between any two senators in this body to become the subject of public observation, and compose a part of the animadversions which senators may choose to throw into their speeches? That is all I have to say upon that point.

Now, with regard to the reference which the gentleman has made to a letter of mine addressed to a free-soil Convention in Ohio during the past summer; that is all fair, and I shall state what the contents of that letter were. I was invited to attend the celebration of the anniversary of the passage of the ordinance of 1787; and I think I gave a very delicate rebuke to the parties sending me an invitation to the celebration of any such day. I said that it was the first time the day had been celebrated, although sixty years have elapsed since the passage of that ordinance. I added, and I add here and everywhere, that not one of them, that no man in the United States was more opposed than I was to the introduction of slavery into any of the new territories of this country by positive enactments of law, and that I did not believe there existed, under the present state of what I conceive to be the laws of Mexico, any right on the part of any individual to carry slaves there. This is what was in the letter.

The honorable senator has chosen to go back for a term of fifty years. I do not know that there is any great merit in uniformity or consistency on the part of public servants. There is one advantage in it, which I will state. If a man is uniform in his conduct, it can always be inferred, if any new case or exigency arises, where he will be; but if he is perpetually vacillating, no matter what may be the motives for the change of his conduct, it is impossible to place him. Although, as an abstract truth, we may possibly allow that where a man honestly changes his opinion, it is from an internal conviction of the error of that opinion, the difficulty is in making mankind believe in his sincerity for having done it. I therefore think it is better, as a general rule for public men, that they should never change their opinion unless on palpable evidence, which all mankind consider as plain.

I have made no change. From the earliest moment when I could consider the institution of slavery, I have held, and I have said, from that day down to the present, again and again, and I shall go to the grave with the opinion, that it is an evil, a social and political evil, and that it is a wrong as it respects those who are subject to the institution of slavery. These are my opinions. I quarrel with no man for holding contrary opinions; and it is perfectly true that in my own State, about this time last year, I addressed a letter to a friend in which I suggested these opinions, and sketched out what appeared to me might be a practicable plan for the gradual emancipation of slavery in Kentucky That letter I chose to put on record. I knew at the moment when I wrote that letter at New Orleans, as well as I know at this moment, that a majority of the people of Kentucky would not adopt my scheme, or probably any project what

ever of gradual emancipation. Perfectly well did I know it; but, sir, I was anxious that, if any one of my posterity, or any human being who comes after me, should have occasion to look into my sentiments and ascertain what they were on this great institution of slavery, to put them on record there; and ineffectual as I saw the project would be, I felt it was a duty which I owed to myself, to truth, to my country, and to my God, to record my sentiments. The State of Kentucky has decided as I anticipated the State would do. I regret it, but I acquiesce in her decision. I wish it had been otherwise; but I acquiesce in it most cheerfully, and no man hereafter will see me making any efforts there, or anywhere else, to disturb the deliberate decision of the commonwealth made after full consideration.

Now, I really should be much indebted to the honorable senator for the sympathy which he felt for me, in respect to the recent attack, which I believe has been in the newspaper which I think has been laid on the tables of all of us. But, sir, I desire the sympathy of no man—the forbearance of no man; I desire to escape from no responsibility of my public conduct on account of my age, or for any other cause. I ask for none. I am in a peculiar situation, Mr. President, if you will allow me to say so -without any earthly object of ambition before me; standing, as it were, upon the brink of eternity; separated to a great extent from all the earthly ties which connect a mortal with his being during this transitory state. I am here expecting soon to go hence, and owing no responsibility but that which I owe to my own conscience and to God. Ready to express my opinions upon all and every subject, I am determined to do so, and no imputation, no threat, no menace, no application of awe or terror to me, will be availing in restraining me from expressing them. None, none whatThe honorable senator, if he chooses, may deem me an abolitionist. Be it so. Sir, if there is a well-abused man in this country-if I were to endeavor to find out the man above all others the most abused by abolitionists, it is the humble individual who is now addressing you. The honorable senator from Mississippi does not perhaps see these papers as I do; but they all pour out from their vials of wrath bitterness which is perfectly indescribable; and they put epithets into their papers accompanied with all the Billingsgate which they can employ, and, lest I should not see them, they invariably take occasion in these precious instances of traduction to send their papers to me. I wish the honorable senator from Mississippi [Mr. Foote] could have an opportunity of seeing some of them.

ever.

MR. CASS. I can give the honorable senator from Mississippi a bushel of them, if he will take the pains to read them; and I must say that the honorable senator from Kentucky is about the best-abused man in all this Union, with perhaps but one exception. [Laughter.]

MR. CLAY. Now, sir, when I brought forward this proposition of mine, which is embraced in these resolutions, I intended, so help me God, to propose a plan of doing equal and impartial justice to the South and to

the North, so far as I could comprehend it; and I think it does yet. But how has this effort been received by the ultraists? Why, at the North they cry out-and it is not that paper alone to which the honorable senator from Iowa [Mr. Dodge] refers, but many other papers also-they all cry out, "It is all concession to the South." And, sir, what is the language in the South? They say, "It is all concession to the North." And I assure you, Mr. President, it has reconciled me very much to my poor efforts, to find that the ultraists, on the one hand and on the other, equally traduce the scheme I propose for conceding every thing to their opponents.

The honorable senator from Mississippi says I have not spoken in such fervent language, on this occasion, as I did eleven years ago. Sir, I think I have employed as strong language as was suited to the occasion, and the office I am endeavoring to perform to both sections of the Union. Did I fail to reproach the North with a violation of constitutional duty with regard to fugitive slaves? Did I fail to go as far-further, perhaps, than any other senator on this floor-to reproach her also, or to remind her, that this feeling was with her a sentiment of philanthropy and humanity only, while with us it was a feeling which involved the safety of our property, a question of life and death? But, sir, I will not take up the time of the Senate in further discussing this matter. The resolutions, and the speech with which I supported them, are both before the country, and of them the country must judge. But, sir, I would ask the honorable senator from Mississippi if he is conscious of the language which he used? He said, if I understood him aright, that when I addressed the Senate on a former occasion, instead of adhering to the interests of the South, I had gone over to the ranks of the enemy. Enemies! Where have we enemies in this happy and glorious confederacy?

[On the 1st of April, 1850, Mr. Clay made some very interesting and touching remarks on the death of the Hon. John C. Calhoun, extracts from which will be found in vol. iii., page 453.]

ON MR. FOOTE'S MOTION

FOR A SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A BILL OF COMPROMISE ON MR. CLAY'S AND MR. BELL'S RESOLUTIONS.

IN SENATE, APRIL 8, 1850.

[ON the 28th of February, one month after Mr. Clay's resolutions of compromise had been submitted, Mr. Bell of Tennessee introduced another set of resolutions having the same object; and Mr. Foote of Mississippi subsequently moved for the appointment of a special committee to prepare a bill or bills of compromise, embracing the general subject of Mr. Clay's and Mr. Bell's resolutions, which resulted in the appointment of the Committee of Thirteen, April 19. It was during the pendency of this motion that Mr. Clay made the following remarks.]

Mr. President-Although far from being well, suffering still under the common malady of the times-the influenza, I suppose-I feel myself called upon to make some reply to a portion of the arguments which we have just heard from the senator from Missouri. Sir, I have to express an unfeigned regret that it is not my fortune to concur in opinion with that senator in reference to the mode of accomplishing a common object which we both have very much at heart. My respect for the ability, and my deference to the long service and great experience of that senator, and my knowledge of the deep interest which he takes, and in which I most heartily share, in the admission of this new State as soon as practicable, renders it extremely unpleasant, and as I think unfortunate, that we should differ as to the means of accomplishing a common object.

Mr. President, I stated on Friday last, and I have on various occasions stated, that, for one, I was ready to vote for the admission of California separately, by itself, and unconnected with any other measures, or in conjunction with other measures. And I stated on that occasion to the Senate and to the senator from Missouri, that I believed, as I yet believe, that the most speedy mode of accomplishing the object which both he and I have in view, is by combining some of these measures in connection with California, and by this combined bill presenting subjects which, I shall presently show, are fairly connected in their nature, to the consideration of

Congress at one and the same time. The whole question between the senator from Missouri and myself, is, which is the best mode of accomplishing the object. I say, connect the several measures together; he says, no, take California separately and alone. Sir, I should be glad, if the experiment could be made without injury to the public, that the two modes should be tested by experience, and it would then be ascertained whether the senator from Missouri or myself was correct. He has made an allusion to a remark of mine on Friday last, with reference to the difficulties that may arise on the passage of a bill alone for the admission of California, and he has inquired what I had in contemplation at the time I made that remark. Mr. President, I had various matters in contemplation at that time, and one was this. About California we all know there is no difficulty as to her admission, either separately or conjointly with other measures: we all know perfectly well that there are large majorities in both Houses in favor of the admission of California. We know at the same time that there are great difficulties with reference to the passage of territorial governments unconnected with the Wilmot proviso. We know that one portion of Congress desire very much the admission of California, when many members comprising that portion are opposed-some to the establishment of any governments at all for the Territories, and many of them to the establishment of such governments without the introduction of the proviso. Thus, while that party, anxious for the accomplishment of its own views and the satisfaction of its own wants, are pressing on for the passage of a bill for the separate admission of California, they are holding back in reference to other subjects equally important to the great object which I trust animates the breasts of all-the great object of quiet and pacific action to the country. And, beside, there are those who desire the establishment of governments for the Territories without the proviso, but who are willing to take the admission of California in combination with governments for the Territories without the proviso. I did allude to other considerations, not likely to happen in this House, but which have happened, and may again happen in the other House of Congress; I did allude to what we heard said, not in approbation-far from it—but with most decided disapprobation of it on my part. I did hear—as we know has occurred once at least on one day during this session-that if it was attempted to force on the minority of that House a measure which is unacceptable to it, and abhorrent to its feelings, without its association with other objects in view, that minority would resort, in resistance of it, not I trust to acts of violence, but to those parliamentary rules and modes of proceeding of which we have had before instances in this country, and which I myself witnessed forty years ago, in a most remarkable degree, in the House of Representatives, and which we know some consider lawful at any time to be employed. For myself, I differ perhaps from most members of this body, or of any deliberative body, on this subject. I am for the trial of mind against mind, of argument against argument, of reason against rea