Page images

that “the further introduction of Slavery or involuntary | port and maintain State rights, which it conceives necesservitude, except for the punishment of crimes whereofsary to be supported and maintained, to preserve the the pariy shall have been duly couvicted, shall be pro. ¡ liberties of the free people of these United States, it hibited ; and that all children born within the said Ter: avows its solemn conviction, that the States already ritory, after its admission into the Union as a State, shall confederated under one common Constitution, have not be free, but may be held to service until the age of twenty- a right to deprive new States of equal privileges with five years."

themselves. Therefore, Resoloed, That the Governor be, and he is hereby, re- Resolved, by the General Assembly of the Commonquested to cause a copy of the foregoing preamble and wealth of Kentucky, That the Senators in Congress from resolution to be transmitted to each of the Senators and this State be instructed, and the Representatives be Representatives of this State in the Congress of the United requested, to use their efforts to procure the passage of a States,

law to admit the people of Missouri into the Union, as a Laid on the table.

State, whether those people will sanction Slavery by THURSDAY, December 16, 1819. their Constitution or not. Agreeably to the order of the day, the House resumed

Resolved, that the Executive of this Commonwealth the consideration of the resolutions postponed on the be requested to transmit this Resolution to the Senators 14th inst., relative to preventing the introduction of and Representatives of this State in Congress, that it Slavery into States hereafter to be admitted into the may be laid before that body for its consideration. Union. And on the question, " Will the House agree to The bill authorizing Missouri to form a conthe resolution ?" the Yeas and Nays were required by Mr. Randall and Mr. Souder, and stood-Yeas 74—(54 stitution, etc., came up in the House as a Democrats, 20 Federalists); Nays none, Among the special order, Jan. 24th. Mr. Taylor, of N. Y., Yeas were David R. Porter, late Governor, Josiah Ran moved that it be postponed for one week: dall of Philadelphia, late Whig, now a leading Democrat; Lost: Yeas 87; Nays 88. William Wilkins, late minister to Russia, since in the

Whereupon the State Senate, Dr. Daniel Sturgeon, late U. 8. Senator, House adjourned. It was considered in cometc., etc. William Duane, editor of The Aurora, then mittee the next day, as also on the 28th and the Democratic organ, also voted for the resolutions, as he had prominently advocated the principle they 30th, and thence debated daily until the 19th asserted.

of February, when a bill came down from the The Senate unanimously concurred, and the Resolves Senate “ to admit the State of Maine into the were signed by Gov. William Findlay.

Union," but with a rider authorizing the people DELAWARE.

of Missouri to form a State Constitution, etc., In Senate of the United States, early in 1820, without restriction on the subject of Slavery. Mr. Van Dyke communicated the following

The House, very early in the session, passed Resolutions of the Legislature of the State of a bill providing for the admission of Maine as a Delaware, which were read:

State. This bill came to the Senate, and was Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives sent to its Judiciary Committee aforesaid, which of the State of Delaware, in General Assembly met: amended it by adding a provision for Missouri as That it is, in the opinion of this General Assembly, the above. After several days' debate in Senate, Mr. constitutional right of the United States, in Congress Roberts, of Pa., moved to recommit, so as to tions for the admission of a new State into the Union, a strike out all but the admission of Maine ; which provision which shall effectually prevent the further was defeated (Jan. 14th, 1820)-Yeas 18; Nayy introduction of Slavery into such state; and that a due 25. Hereupon Mr. Thomas, of III., (who voted regard to the true interests of such State, as well as of with the majority, as uniformly against any

Resolved, That a copy of the above and foregoing restriction on Missouri) gave notice that he resolution be transmitted, by the Speaker of the should Senate, to each of the Senators and Representatives from this State in the Congress of the United States. "ask leave to bring a bill to prohibit the introduction

of Slavery into the Territories of the United States KENTUCKY.

North and West of the contemplated State of Mis

souri ;" In Senate, January 24th, 1820, Mr. Logan

-which he accordingly did on the 19th ; when communicated the following preamble and Re

it was read and ordered to a third reading. solutions of the Legislature of the State of Kentucky, which were read:

[Note.-Great confusion and misconception exists in

the public mind with regard to the “Missouri RestricWhereus, The Constitution of the United States pro- tion," two totally different propositions being called by vides for the admission of new States into the Union, and that name. The original. Restriction, which Mr. Clay it is just and proper that all such States should be estab- vehemently opposed, and Mr. Jefferson in a letter lished upon the footing of original States, with a view characterized as a “fire-bell in the night," contemplated to the preservation of State Sovereignty, the prosperity the limitation of Slavery in its exclusion from the State of such new State, and the good of their citizens ; and of Missouri. This was ultimately defeated, as we shall whereas, successful attempts have been heretofore The second proposed Restriction was that of Mr. made, and are now making, to prevent the People of the Thomas, just cited, which proposed the exclusion of

Territory of Missouri from being admitted into the Union Slavery, not from the State of Missouri, but from the as a State, unless trammeled by rules and regulations Territories of the United States North and West of that which do not exist in the original States, particularly in State. This proposition did not emanate from the origirelation to the toleration of Slavery.

nal Missouri Restrictionists, but from their adversaries, Whereas, also, if Congress can thus trammel or and was but reluctantly and partially accepted by the control the powers of a Territory in the formation of a former.] State government, that body may, on the same principle, reduce its powers to little more than those possessed

The Maine admission bill, with the proposed by the people of the District of Columbia, and whilst amendments, was discussed through several professing to make it a Sovereign State, may bind it in days, until, Feb. 16th, the question was taken perpetual vassalage, and reduce it to the condition of a province; such State must necessarily become the

on the Judiciary Committee's amendments dependent of Congress, asking such powers, and not the authorizing Missouri to form a State Constituindependent State, demanding rights. And whereas, it tion, and saying nothing of Slavery), which is necessary, in preserving the State Sovereignties in their present rights, that no new State should be sub

were adopted by the following vote : jected to this restriction, any more than an old one, and Year-Against the Restriction on Missouri, 23. that there can be no reason or justice why it should not be entitled to the same privileges, when it is bound to

[20 from Slave States; 3 from Free States.) bear all the burdens and taxes laid upon it by Congress. Nays-For Restriction, 21.

In passing the following resolution, the General Assembly refrains from expressing any opinion either in

[19 from Free States ; 2 from Delaware.) favor or against the principles of Slavery ; but to sup- Mr. Thomas, of III., then proposed his amend


ment, which, on the following day, he withdrew effect, though the more determined champions, and substituted the following:

whether of Slavery Extension or Slavery ReAnd be it further enacted, That in all that Territory striction, did not unite in it.] ceded by France to the United States under the name of The bill, thus amended, was ordered to be Louisiana which lies north of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, excepting only such part thereor i engrossed for a third reading by the following as is included within the limits of the State contemplated vote: by this act, Slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise Yeas-For the Missouri Bill : than in the punishment of crime whereof the party shall

Lloyd of Md., have been duly convicted, shall be and is hereby forever | Messrs. Barbour of Va., prohibited. Provided always, that any person escaping

Brown of La.,

Logan of Ky.,
Eaton of Tenn.,

Parrott of N H., into the same, from where labor or service is lawfully

Edwards of III., claimed in any State or Territory of the United States,

Pinkney of Md.,
Elliott of Ga.,

Pleasants of Va., such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed

Gaillard of S. C., Stokes of N. C., to the person claiming his or her labor or service as

Horsey of Del., Thomas of IVI., aforesaid.

Hunter of R. I., Van Dyke of Del., Mr. Trimble, of Ohio, moved a substitute for Johnson of Ky.,

Walker of Ala., this, somewhat altering the boundaries of the

Johnson of La.,

Walker of Ga.,
King of Ala.,

Williams of Miss regions shielded from Slavery, which was

Leake of Miss.,

Williams of Tenn-24. rejected : Yeas 20 (Northern); Nays 24

Nays-against the Bill: (Southern).

Messrs. Burrill of R. I., Otis of Mass., The question then recurred on Mr. Thomas's Dana of Conn., Palmer of Vt., amendment, which was adopted, as follows:

Dickerson of N. J., Roberts of Pa.,

King of N. Y., Ruggles of Ohio, Yeas-For excluding Slavery from all the Lanman of Conn., Sanford of N. Y., Territory North and West of Missouri :

Lowrie of Pa.,

Smith of S. C.,
Mellen of Mass.,

Macon of N. C.,
Messrs. Brown of La.,

Taylor of Ind.

Mellen of Mass., Tichenor of Vt.,
Burrill of R. I., Morrill of N. H.,

Morrill of N, H.,

Trimble of Ohio.,
Dana of Conn.,

Otis of Mass.,
Dickerson of N. J., Palmer of Vt.,

Noble of Ind.,

Wilson of N. J.-20. Eaton of Tenn., Parrott of N. H.,

The bill was thus passed (Feb. 18th) without Edwards of Ill., Pinkney of Md.,

further division, and sent to the House for conHorsey of Del., Roberts of Pa., Hunter of R. I.,

currence. Ruggles of Ohio,

In the House, Mr. Thomas's amendJohnson of Ky., Sanford of N. Y., ment (as above) was at first rejected by both Johnson of La.. Stokes of N. C.,

parties, and defeated by the strong vote of 159 King (Wm. R.) of Ala., Thomas of Ill.,

to 18. The Yeas (to adopt) were,
King (Rufus) of N. Y., Tichenor of Vt.,
Lanman of Conn.,
Trimble of Ohio,
Messrs. Baldwin of Pa.,

Meech, of Vt.,
Leake of Miss.,
Van Dyke of Del.,

Bayly of Md.,

Mercer of Va.,
Lowrie of Pa.,
Walker of Ala.,

Bloomfield of N. J., Quarles of Ky.,
Lloyd of Md.,
Williams of Tenn.,

Cocke of Tenn.,

Ringgold of Md.,
Logan of Ky.,
Wilson of N. J.-34.

Crafts of Vt.,

Shaw of Mass., Nays-Against such Restriction:

Culpepper of N. C., Sloan of Ohio

Kinsey of N, J., Smith of N. J.,
Messrs. Barbour of Va., Pleasants of Va.,

Lathrop of Mass., Smith of Md.,
Elliott of Ga.,
Smith (Wm.) of 8. O..

Little of Md.,

Tarr of Pa---18.
Gaillard of S. C., Taylor of Ind.,
Macon of N. C., Walker of Ga.,

Prior to this vote, the House disagreed to
Noble of Ind.,

Williams of Miss.-10. the log-rolling of Maine and Missouri, into one [It will here be seen that the Restriction ulti- biil by the strong vote of 93 to 72. [We do mately adopted--that excluding Slavery from not give the Yeas and Nays on this decision ; all territory then owned by the United States but the majority was composed of the repreNorth and West of the Southwest border of the sentatives of the Free States with only four exState of Missouri-was proposed by an early and ceptions; and Mr. Louis McLane of Delaware, steadfast opponent of the Restriction originally who was constrained by instructions from his proposed, relative to Slavery in the contem- legislature. His colleague, Mr. Willard Hall, plated State of Missouri, and was sustained by did not vote.] the votes of fourteen Senators from Slave States, The members from Free States who voted including the Senators from Delaware, Mary- with the South to keep Maine and Missouri land, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and united in one bill were, Louisiana, with one vote each from North Messrs. H. Baldwin of Pa., Henry Meigs of N. Y., Carolina and Mississippi.

Bloomfield of N. J., Henry Shaw of Mass., The current assumption that this Restriction The House also disagreed to the remaining was proposed by Rufus King, of New York, and amendments of the Senate (striking out the remainly sustained by the antagonists of Slavery striction on Slavery in Missouri) by the strong Extension, is wholly mistaken. The truth, vote of 102 Yeas to 68 Nays. doubtless, is, that it was suggested by the more [Nearly or quite every Representative of a moderate opponents of the proposed Restriction Free State voted in the majority on this division, on Missouri --and supported also by Senators with the following from Slave States : from Slave States as a means of overcoming Louis McLane, Del., Nelson, Md., the resistance of the House to Slavery in Mis- Alney McLean, Ky. Trimble, Ky.] souri. It was, in effect, an offer from the So the House rejected all the Senate's milder opponents of Slavery Restriction to the amendments, a’nd returned the bill with a cormore moderate and flexible advocates of that responding message. Restriction—“Let us have Slavery in Missouri, The Senate took up the bill on the 24th, and and we will unite with you in excluding it from debated it till the 28th; when, on a direct vote, all the uninhabited territories North and West it was decided not to recede from the attachof that State." It was in substance an agree- ment of Missouri to the Maine bill: Yeas 21 ; ment between the North and the South to that|(19 from Free States and two from Delaware ;)

[ocr errors]


Nays, 23 ; (20 from Slave States with Messrs. DELAWARE.-Louis McLane-1.
Taylor of Ind., Edwards and Thomas of IU.)

MARYLAND.-Stephenson Archer, Thomas Bayly,

Thomas Culbreth, Joseph Kent, Peter Little, Raphael The Senate also voted not to recede from its Neale, Samuel Ringgold, Banuel Smith, Henry R. Waramendment prohibiting Slavery west of Mis- field—9. souri, and north of 36° 30', north Jatitude. P. Barbour, William A, Burwell, John Floyd, Robert s

VIRGINIA.—Mark Alexander, William S. Archer, Philip (For receding, 9 from Slave States, with Messrs. Garnett, James Johnson, James Jones, William McCoy, Noble and Taylor of Ind. : against it, 33—(22 Charles F. Mercer, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Nelson, Severn from Slave States, 11 from Free States.) The E. Parker, Jas. Pindall, John_Randolph, Ballard Smith,

Alexander Smyth, George F. Strother, Thomas Van remaining amendments of the Senate were Swearingen, George Tucker, John Tyler, Jared Williams then insisted on without division, and the -22. House notified accordingly.

NORTH CAROLINA.-Hutchins G. Burton, John CulpepThe bill was now returned to the House, Fisher, Thomas H. Hall, Charles Hooks, Thomas Settle,

per, William Davidson, Weldon N. Edwards, Charles which, on motion of Mr. John W. Taylor of Jesse 'Slocumb, James 's. Smith, Felix Walker, Lewis N. Y, voted to insist on its disagreement to all Williams-12. but Sec. 9 of the Senate's amendments, by Yeas Erwin, William Lowndes, James McCreary, James Over

SOUTH CAROLINA.- Josiah Brevard, Elias Earle, James 97 to Nays 76: (all but a purely sectional vote : street, Charles Pinckney, Eldred Simkins, Sterling Hugh Nelson of Va. voting with the North ; Tucker-9. Baldwin of Pa., Bloomfield of N. J., and Shaw Crawford, John A. Cuthbert, Robert R. Reid, William

GEORGIA.-Joel A. Abbot, Thomas W. Cobb. Joel of Mass., voting with the South).

Terrill---6. Sec. 9, (the Senate's exclusion of Slavery ALABAMA.-John Crowell-1. from the Territory north and west of Missouri)

MISSISSIPPI.-John Rankin-1.

LOUISIANA.-Thomas Butler-1. was also rejected-Yeas 160; Nays, 14, (much

KENTUCKY—Richard C. Anderson, jr., William Brown, as before). The Senate thereupon (March 2nd) Benjamin Hardin, Alney McLean, Thomas Metcalf, Tunpassed the House's Missouri bill

, striking out stali Quarles, Geo. Robertson, David Trimble-8. the restriction of Slavery by Yeas 27 to Nays Cannon, John Cocke, Francis Jones, John Rhea-—5.

TENNESSER.-Robert Allen, Henry H. Bryan, Newton 15, and adding without a division the exclusion of Slavery from the territory west and north of

Total Yeas from Slave States, 76 ; in all 90. said State. Mr. Trimble again moved the ex- Nays Against giving up the Restriction on clusion of Slavery from Arkansas also, but was

Slavery in Missouri, again voted down, Yeas, 12; Nays, 30.

New-HAMPSHIRE.-Joseph Buffum, jr., Josiah Butler, The Senate now asked a conference, which Clifton Clagett, Arthur Livermore, William Plumer, jr.,

Nathaniel Upham-6. the House granted without a division. The

MASSACHUSETTS (including Maine).-Benjamin Adams, Committee of Conference was composed of Samuel C. Allen, Joshua Cushman, Edward Powse, WalMessrs. Thomas of Illinois, Pinkney Maryland, ter Folger, jr., Timothy Fuller, Jonas Kendall, Martin and Barbour of Va. (all anti-restrictionists), on

Kinsley, Samuel Lathrop, Enoch Lincoln, Marcus Mor

Jeremiah Nelson, James Parker, Zabdiel Sampson, the part of the Senate, and Messrs. Holmes of Nathaniel Silsbee, Ezekiel Whitman-16. Mass., Taylor of N. Y., Lowndes of S. C., RHODE ISLAND.-Nathaniel Hazard-1. Parker of Mass., and Kinsey of N. J., on the John Russ, Gideon Tomlinson-4.

CONNECTICUT.-Jonathan 0. Moseley, Elisha Phelps, part of the House. (Such constitution of the

VERMONT.-Samuel C. Crafts, Rollin C. Mallar, Ezra Committee of Conference was in effect a sur. Meech, Charles Rich, Mark Richards, William Stropg-6. render of the Restriction on the part of the Clark, Jacob 7. De Witt, John D. Dickinson, John Way

NEW-YORK.-Nathaniel Allen, Caleb Baker, Robert House.) John Holmes of Mass., from this Com-William D. Ford, Ezra' c. Gross, James Guyon, jr.: mittee, in due time (March 2nd), reported that, | Aaron Hackley, jr., George Hall, Joseph S. Lyman:

1. The Senate should give up the combina- Robert Monell, Nathaniel Pitcher, Jonathan Richmond, tion of Missouri in the same bill with Maine.

Randall S. Street, James Strong, John W. Taylor, Alukert

H. Tracy, Solomon Van Rensselear, Peter H. Wendover, 2. The House should abandon the attempt Silas Wood—22. to restrict Slavery in Missouri.

New-Jerszy.—Ephraim Bateman, John Linn, Henry 3. Both Houses should agree


PennsyLVANIA.—Andrew Boden, William Darlington, Senate's separate Missouri bill, with Mr. George Dennison, Samuel Edwards, Thomas Forrest Thomas's restriction or compromising proviso, Samuel Gross, Joseph Hemphill, Jacob Hibschman. excluding Slavery from all Territory north and Joseph Heister, Jacob Hostetter, William P. Macla

David Marchand, Robert Moore, Samuel Moore, Joh west of Missouri.

Murray, Thomas Patterson, Robert Philson, Thomas The report having been read, the first and Rogers, John Sergeant, Christian Tarr, James M. Wai most important question was put, viz:


Oh10.-Philemon Beecher, Henry Brush, John Will the House concur with the Senate lu so much of Campbell, Samuel Herrick, Thomas R. Ross, John Sloar the said amendments as proposes to strike from the -6. fourth section of the Missouri) bill the provision prohib- INDIANA.-William Hendricks-1. iting Slavery or involuntary servitude, in the contem- ILLINOIS.-Daniel P. Cook-1. plated State, otherwise than in the punishment of

Total, Nays, 87—all from Free States. On which question the Yeas and Nays were (The members apparently absent on this irol demanded, and were as follows:

portant division, were Henry W. Edwards of YEAS-For giving up Restrictions on Mis- Conn., Walter Case and Honorius Peck of N. 2x souri :

and John Condit of N. J., from the Free Statenses MASSACHUSETTS.Mark Langdon Hill, John Holmes, Walker of Ky., from the Slave States.

with Lemuel Sawyer of N. C., and Dawvid Jonathan Mason, Henry Shaw–4. RHODE ISLAND.-Samuel Eddy-1.

Clay of Ky., being Speaker, did not vote.) CONNECTICUT.-Samuel A. Foot, James Stephens-2. This defeat broke the back of the North New-YORK –Henry Meigs, Henry R. Storrs—2.

New.Jersey-Joseph Bloomfield, Charles Kinsey, Ber- resistance to receiving Missouri as a slave aard Smith-3.

State. PENNSYLVANIA.—Henry Baldwin, David Fullerton- Mr. Taylor, of N. Y., now moved an ameri-lid. Total from Free-States 14.

ment, intended to include Arkansas Territamory


crimes ?





under the proposed Inhibition of Slavery west compromise, which were twice voted down by of Missouri; but this motion was cut off by the the Northern members, aided by John Randolph Previous Question, (which then cut off amend- and three others from the South, who would ments more rigorously, according to the rules have Missouri admitted without condition or of the House, than it now does), and the House qualification. At last, Mr. Clay proposed a Joint proceeded to concur

with the Senate in inserting Committee on this subject, to be chosen by balthe exclusion of Slavery from the territory lot—which the House agreed to by 101 to 55; west and north of Missouri, instead of that just and Mr. Clay became its Chairman. By this stricken out by, 134 Yeas to 42 Nays, (the Nays Committee, it was agreed that a solemn pledge being from the South). So the bill was passed should be required of the Legislature of Misin the form indicated above; and the bill ad- souri that the Constitution of that State should mitting Maine as a State, (relieved, by a confer- not be construed to authorize the passage of ence, from the Missouri rider,) passed both any Act, and that no Act should be passed, Houses without a divison, on the following day. by which any of the citizens of either of the

Such was the virtual termination of the strug. States should be excluded from the enjoyment gle for the restriction of Slavery in Missouri, of the privileges and immunities to which they which was beaten by the plan of proffering in are entitled under the Constitution of the United stead an exclusion of Slavery from all the then States.” The Joint Resolution, amended by federal territory west and north of that State. the addition of this proviso, passed the House It is unquestionable that, without this compromise by 86 Yeas to 82 Nays; the Senate concurred or equivalent, the Northern votes, which passed (Feb. 27th, 1821,) by 26 Yeas to 15 Nays—(all the bill, could not have been obtained for it. Northern but Macon, of N. C.); Missouri com

plied with the condition, and became an ac

cepted member of the Union. Thus closed the Though the acceptance of Missouri as a last stage of the fierce Missouri Controversy, State, with a Slave Constitution, was forever which for a time seemed to threaten-as so many Bettled by the votes just recorded, a new excite- other controversies have harmlessly threatened ment, sprang up on her presenting herself to --the existence of the Union. Congress (Nov. 16, 1820),) with a State Constitution, framed on the 19th of July, containing

EXTENSION OF MISSOURI. the following resolutions :

The State of Missouri, as originally organized, The General Assembly shall have no power to

was bounded on the west by a line already laws, First, for the emancipation of slaves without the specified, which excluded a triangle west of consent of their owners, or without paying them, before said line, and between it and the Missouri, such emancipation, a full equivalent for such slaves so which was found, in time, to be exceedingly emancipated; and, Second, to prevent bona fide emi. grants to this state, or actual settlers therein, from fertile and desirable. It was free soil by the bringing from any of the United States, or from any of terms of the Missouri compact, and was also their Territories, such persons as may there be deemed to be slaves, so long as any persons of the same description covered by Indian reservations, not to be are allowed to be held as slaves by the laws of this state. removed without a concurrence of two-thirds

It shall be their duty, as soon as may be, to of the Senate. Messrs. Benton and Linn, Senapass such laws as may be necessary,

First, to prevent free negroes and mulattoes from tors from Missouri, undertook the difficult task coming to, and settling in, this State, under any pretext of engineering through Congress a bill includ

ing this triangle (large enough to form seven The North, still smarting under a sense of its Counties) within the State of Missouri; which defeat on the question of excluding Slavery from they effected, at the long session of 1835-6, so Missouri, regarded this as needlessly defiant, quietly as hardly to attract attention. The bill insulting, and inhuman, and the section last was first sent to the Senate's Committee on the quoted as palpably in violation of that clause Judiciary, where a favorable report was proof the Federal Constitution which gives to the cared from Mr. John M. Clayton, of Delaware, citizens of each State (which blacks are, in its Chairman ; and then it was floated through several Free States), the rights of citizens in both Houses without encountering the perils of every State. A determined resistance to any a division. The requisite Indian treaties were such exclusion was manifested, and a portion likewise carried through the Senate; so Missouri of the Northern Members evinced a disposition became possessed of a large and desirable to renew the struggle against the further intro accession of territory, which has since become duction of slaves into Missouri. At the first one of her most populous and wealthy sections, effort to carry her admission, the House voted devoted to the growing of hemp, tobacco, etc., it down-Yeas, 79; Nays, 93. A second at- and cultivated by slaves. This is the most protempt to admit her, on condition that she would Slavery section of the State, in which was expunge the obnoxious clause (last quoted) of originated, and was principally sustained, that her Constitution, was voted down still more de- series of inroads into Kansas, corruptions of cisively-Yeas, 6; Nays 146.

her ballot-boxes, and outrages upon her people, The House now rested, until a joint resolve, which earned for their authors the appellation adınitting her with but a vague and ineffective of Border Ruffians. qualification, came down from the Senate, where it was passed by a vote of 26 to 18-six Sena. tors from Free States in the affirmative. Mr. The name of Texas was originally applied to Clay, who had resigned in the recess, and been a Spanish possession or province, lying between succeeded, as Speaker, by John W. Taylor, of the Mississippi and the Rio Grande del Norte, New-York, now appeared as the leader of the but not extending to either of these great rivers. Missouri admissionists, and proposed terms of It was an appendage of the Viceroyalty of



[ocr errors]

Mexico, but bad very few civilized inhabitants other southwestern States, began to concentrate down to the time of the separation of Mexico I itself in Texas. The emigrants carried rifles ; from Spain. On two or three occasions, bands i many of them were accompanied by slaves; of French adventurers had landed on its coast, j and it was well understood that they did not or entered it from the adjoining French colony intend to become Mexicans, much less to relinof Louisiana; but they had uniformly been quish their slaves. When Gen. Sam. Houston treated as intruders, and either destroyed or left Arkansas for Texas, in 1834-6, the Little made prisoners by the Spanish military authori- Rock Journal, which announced his exodus and ties. No line had ever been drawn between destination, significantly added : " We shall, the two colonies; but the traditional line be- doubtless, hear of his raising his flag there tween them, south of the Red River, ran some- shortly.” That was a foregone conclusion. what within the limits of the present State of Of course, the new settlers in Texas did not Louisiana.

lack pretexts or provocations for such a step. When Louisiana was transferred by France to Mexico was then much as she is now, mis. the United States, without specification of governed, turbulent, anarchical, and despotic. ooundaries, collisions of claims on this frontier The overthrow of her Federal Constitution by was apprehended. General Wilkinson, com- Santa Anna was one reason assigned for the manding the United States troops, moved gra- rebellion against her authority which broke out dually to the west; the Spanish commandant in in Texas. In 1835, her independence was Texas likewise drew toward the frontier, until declared ; in 1836, at the decisive battle of San they stood opposite each other across what was Jacinto, it was, by the rout and capture of the then tacitly settled as the boundary between the Mexican dictator, secured. This triumph was the two countries. This was never afterward won by emigrants from this country almost disregarded.

exclusively; scarcely half a dozen of the old In 1819, Spain and the United States seemed Mexican inhabitants participating in the revoluon the verge of war. General Jackson hadtion. Santa Anna, while a prisoner, under twice invaded Florida, on the assumption of restraint and apprehension, agreed to a peace complicity on the part of her rulers and people on the basis of the independence of Texasma -first with our British, then with our savage covenant which he had no power, and probably enemies--and had finally overrun, and, in effect, no desire, to give effect to when restored to annexed it to the Union. Spain, on the other liberty. The Texans, pursuing their advantage, hand, had preyed upon our commerce during twice or thrice penetrated other Mexican prothe long wars in Europe, and honestly owed our vinces—Tamaulipas, Coahuila, etc., --and waved merchants large sums for unjustifiable seizures their Lone Star flag in defiance on the banks and spoliations. A negotiation for the settle of the Rio Grande del Norte; which position, ment of these differences was carried on at however, they were always compelled soon to Washington, between John Quincy Adams, Mr. abandon--once with severe loss. Their governMonroe's Secretary of State, and Don Onis, the ment, nevertheless, in reiterating their declaraSpanish embassador, in the course of which Mr. tion of independence, claimed the Rio Grande as Adams set up a claim, on the part of this their western boundary, from its source to its country, to Texas as a natural geographical mouth, including a large share of Tamaulipas, appendage not of Mexico, but of Louisiana. Coahuila, Durango, and by far the more imporThis claim, however, he eventually waived and tant and populous portion of New Mexico. And relinquished, in consideration of a cession of it was with this claim, expressly set forth in the Florida by Spain to this country-our govern- treaty, that President Tyler and his responsible ment agreeing, on its part, to pay the claims of advisers negotiated the first official project of our merchants for spoliations. Texas remained, annexation, which was submitted to the Senate, therefore, what it always had been-a depart- during the session of 1843-4, and rejected by a ment or province of Mexico, with a formal very decisive vote: only fifteen (mainly Southquit-claim thereto on the part of the United ern) senators voting to confirm it. Col. Benton, States.

and others, urged this aggressive claim of The natural advantages of this region in boundary, as affording abundant reason for the time attracted the attention of American adven- rejection of this treaty; but it is not known turers, and a small colony of Yankees was set that the Slavery aspect of the case attracted tled thereon, about 1819-20, by Moses Austin, especial attention in the Senate. The measure, of Connecticut. Other settlements followed. however, had already been publicly eulogized Originally, grants of land in Texas were prayed by Gen. James Hamilton, of s. C., as calfor, and obtained of the Mexican Government, culated to "give a Gibraltar to the South," and on the assumption that the petitioners were had, on that ground, secured a very general Roman Catholics, persecuted in the United and ardent popularity throughout the SouthStates because of their religion, and anxious to West. And, more than a year previously, sevefind a refuge in some Catholic country. Thus ral northern members of Congress had united in all the early emigrants to Texas went pro- the following: fessedly as Catholics, no other religion being TO THE PEOPLE OF THE FREE STATES OF THE tolerated.

UNION. Slavery was abolished by Mexico soon after the consummation of her independence, when stituents and our country as members of the 27th Con.

We, the undersigned, in closing our duties to our convery few slaves were, or ever had been, in Texas. gress, feel bound to call your attention, very brigefly, to But, about 1834, some years after this event, a the project, long entertained by a portion of the people quiet, but very general, and evidently con, and intended soon to be consummated : THE ANNJEXATION

of these United States, still pertinaciously adh ered to, certed, emigration, mainly from Tennessee and lor TEXAS TO THIS Union. In the press of business inci

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »