Newspaper Page Text
Ell wood rUbeT^Edwin Do t*OQ. ">
TERMS. DAILY, $10 00 TRI WEEKLY, 5 00 WEEKLY, - - . - - - - 2 00 Subscriptions payable in advance. Any person procuriuc five subscribers shall receive otic copy gratis. All letters to the Editors to be ratr-PaiD. I PRI.VTED ?r G. A. SAGE A HEIt. H. HEATH. OrriCE, Pennsylvania Avenue south side, between a <i .. THE SOUTHERN PRESS. I . . - ? ,, II HI 1 LUL DAIIiY. Vol. 1. Washington, WfdnesHny, June ?6,1850. No. 9. JU RUU *?* ? Land of the South. BY X- B. Mti.k , tJ?. Land of the South! imperial land! How proud thy mountains rise; How sweet thy scenes on every hand, How fair thy covering skies: But not for this?oh, not fbr thee 1 love thy fields to roam? Thou hast a dearer charm to me? Thou art my native home! Thy rivers roll their liquid wealth, Unequalled, to the sea; Thy hills and valleys bloom with health, And green with verdure be, But not for thy proud oceun streams, Nor for thy azure dome? Sweet sunny South, 1 cling to thee ? Thou art my native home! I've stood beneath Itulia's clime, Beloved of tale and song; On Heloyn's hills, proud and sublime, Where Nature's wonders throng; By Tempe's classic sunlit streams, Where gods of old did roam? But ne'er nave found so fair a land, As thou?my native home. And thou hast prouder glories too, TKn n rirttii rn ovnt* o n rn Peace sheds o'er thee her genial dew, And freedom's pinions wave, Fair Science flings her pearls around, Religion lifts her dome; These, these endear thee to my heart? My own loved, native home. And "Heaven's beat gift to man" is thine? God bless thy rosy girls! Like sylvan flowers, tney sweetly shine? Their hearts are pure as pearls; And grace and goodness circle them, Where'er their footsteps roam? How can I thon, whilst loving them, Not love my native home? Land of the South?imperial land ! Then here 'a a health to thee; Long as thy mountain barriers stand, May'at thou be blessed and free! Mav aark dissension's banner ne'er Wave o'er thy fertile loam, But should it come, there's one will die To save his native home. THE CALIFORNIA AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS. SPEECH OF MR. M. J. WELLBORN, OF GEORGIA, In the House of Representatives, Mondat, June 10, 1850, In Committee of tha Whole on the state of the Union, on the President's Message transmitting the Constitution of California. Mr. WELLBORN said: Mr. Chairman: It may be remembered that at an early stage of this debate I submitted to the committee, as a mode of settling the issues in hand, the revival and extension to the Pacific ocean, of the Missouri compromise line, with such a modification of its terms as would have brought it to bear the same relation in effect to the subject of slavery in our present territories as it bore to it in the territories of Louisiana and Texas on the several occasions of its application to them, with the exception of that portion of California which lies north of 36? 30'. In respect to the latter section, my proposition was to leave it subject to the lately adopted constitution of California, with a view to her admission into the UntSn. The leading idea was, the prohibition of African slavery, north, and the express recognition of it, south, of the parallel indicated, to the Pacific. I propose to ofTer now some arguments additional to those hitherto urged in behalf of that scheme of adjustment. It is to me, sir, a matter of regret, that the plan under notice has not been kept more distinctly in view during the protracted struggles of the session. That it has not been more generally urged by representatives from the slaveholding States, has been owing, as I think, to the hope entertained by them that some other mode might ,be substituted for it which would meet with less opposition, and at the same time prove acceptable to the nation at large. This motive, then, I submit, but the more strongly recommends the plan, now that all other methods proposed have failed to give the desired satisfaction. As the constitutional authority of this Government to prohibit slavery in the public territories, involved in the passage of the Missouri compromise line, has been generally denied by the slaveholding Stutes, and that denial is noWmade the foundation of actual opposition to some extent, a brief reference to that subject would seem to be demanded. In alluding to it, however, 1 propose, rather to bring forward those aspects of the ques lion or jurisdiction in wmcti opposing opinions have been, on former occasions, blended in legislation founded on the affirmative of it, than to extend the vast train of argumentation which has been drawn out in the eilort to reach a satisfactory solution of it. Two separate sources have been relied on by thoso who affirm that the power in view exists. It is by many supposed to rest on the grant to Congress, of the authority "to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory, or other rublic property belonging to the United States." t is sufficient fof our present purpose to remark here, that able and well-informed minds who have stood fqr years on this clause as the source of plenipotent political authority, on a closer scrutiny of the context with which the power to pass "rules and regulations'' is connected?a more cautious study of the probable import of these somewhat equivocal terms, "rules and regulations," as they are related in the Constitution, and a more comprehensive survey of the relation of the States to the general subject of public of common territory on (hp adoption of the Constitution, have abandoned it. Others see in the power to acquire, hold, and dispose of, the unrestrained power of governing, i'hey see in it that broad authority by which the Congress may do with their acquisitions as they will: and statesmen arc not wanting, who, pursuing, as they suppose, a process of fair reasoning, reach the conclusion that certain limitations on the powers of Congress usually regarded as universal, such as the disability to establish a national religion, to give out titles of nobility, etc., have reaped only to the action of Congress within the States and territory on hand when the Constitution was adopted, and that in respect to subsequently accruing territorial acquisitions this Government stands in the relation of a simple despotism. But to recur from this extreme of opinion: it is alleged by more moderate rcasoners, that the power to acquire includes those general powers of government, of which that to prohibit slavery is but n particular. The reasoning runs qomewhat thus: When this Government became the assignee by conquest and purchase of California and New Mexico, what, relative to these provinces it is inquired, was embraced in the transfer? Did we receive but the title to the soil, and Mexico retain in the whole or in part, the right to govern ? Are ? ?? ??-??'l flint urn nrnniml these Territories in all their attributes and susceptibilities, political WdU aa territorial? Does the power of selfgovernment inhere by the law of nature, or otherwise, in the provinces themaelves ? It is deemed by many a sufficient answer to that to say, that we are discussing political and not natural rights: Hi have conquered and purchased them. But may not certain of the greater proprietary rights, the authority, for example, to give them the outlines of political organisation, reside in this Government, and the right to .regulate their more immediately muflfcipal affairs including the regulation of labor, j remain in them ? This interrogatory is replied to | by the inquiry, Who divided the attributes of government between as and them? In what map of political geography shall ws trace the boundary line between our power tq acquire, bold, and settle California or New Mexico, dnd the power of California or Netr Mexico to dictate to us the terms and conditions on, and in which, wo can alone acquire, hold, or settle them? Again: the individual citisens of the several Stnics cannot, as an aggregate mass, govern these Territories. The States cannot, separately, nor in simple convenjon, 50mn thsm. ( In some one or the other of the viewa thus briefly pointed to in these inquiries, perhaps a majority of the people of the Union have been accustomed to claim plenary political government over the Territories, and on three several occasions?under protest and by compromise, however ?the precise act of interdicting sluvery in portions of them has been executed by the concurrence of the dtiVercul brandies of the General Government. On the other hand, it has been urged with a zeal certainly as honest, and I must think with ?? stronger display of justice, that a power not expressly granted in the Constitution to this Government, cannot be rightly implied, or inferred, by virtue of it, in precise opposition to Us principles and spir'U, as this is believed to be. Is it allow- ! able to search the general grants of power in the Constitution in quest of a latent or incidental faculty, which, put forth, proves to be at variance alike with the relations of the parties to the instrument, the objects of their union, and the observance of the most common-placc ideas of justice and equality among them? Especially, is it insisted that it cannot be Baid to be, in uny just sense of the torm, " constitutional" for the Federal Government to hamper or abridge the enjoyment of rights of property of the citizens of the | States, secured to them by the laws of their Stales respectively, and guarantied by the fundamental law of its own being. Such, it so happens, is slavery as u sianus reiaicu 10 uom me laws or me sluveholding States and Ute Constitution of the United States. And must it not be conceded, on all sides, that if such a power have found way into the Constitution it can only have been conveyed thither as an unobserved ingredient of a main power, having not the remotest designed bcar, ing on the point in controversy, and never revolved in the thoughts of the framers of the Government in connection with such an exercise of it? Could it be, then, satisfactorily shown to be an involved or resulting power or faculty in our hands, so gross a perversion of it to purposes of injustice as would be its universal application to our common i territories, would not only justify, but demand, the sternest resistance. I have thus but pointed to the leading sources of the diversity in judgment that has ever existed on this mooted point. Multiplied and involved, ts investigation has only proved it to be, in its windings, as were the labarynths of old, unlike them it seems to have no sure clue to an escape. It is related, Mr. Chairman, that when Alexander the Great found himself unable to disentangle the knot which the kingly Gordius tied in the harness of his chariot as the test of the skill of him who, by oracular interpretation, was to be the future conquerer of the world, he cut it asunder with his sword, and thus advanced on the objects of his grand contemplations. Let us, like others who have preceded us here, avoiding the errors of his ambition, profit by the courage and wisdom of this example. Nor am I able to perceive any great weight in that standing charge of inconsistency with which we are assailed, for disputing in argumeut Unconstitutional authority of Congress to prohibit slavery, and yet consenting to the passage of the Missouri compromise line. Is it incomprehensible that we should feel justified in drawing arguments from welt-founded doubts as to the existence of a power against an extortionate and opprcsive use of it, and, availing ourselves of the authority ol the history of legislation, be at the same time willing to unite with its advocates in 8U9I1 an application of it as will subserveat once the public justice and the demands of a great public emergency r Wise and good men it seems, nave on occasions heretofore borne this criticism. And now, one word more, sir, as to the ell'ect of the line, on the supposition that the denial of the right to pass it should be well founded. Obviously it would be this, that south of the line the act passed here would take effect in protecting the slaveholder, because passed in execution of the Constitution, while north of it, it could not harm him, because, as being opposed to the Constitution, it would be aimply null and void. Argument can scarce make this proposition plainer: for .if the Constitution, ex propiio vigore, convey slavery into these territories, the argument is manifestly but the stronger for the passage of legislation here, to secure tht convenient use of it there, while no law of this Congress proposing to abridge a right guarantied by the Constitution can have any validity. Nor could such a discovery justinaoiy excite any other feeling than that of univcrsul regret that a large portion of the citizens of the country had noi been supplied with legal remedies and social securities commensurate with their fundamental rights. It is thus seen that I totally disagree with certain reasoners who insist that the power of this Government to protect the institution of slavery in the territories, involves with it either by necessary connection or rational analogy, the power to prohibit it there. On the contrary, the power of Gov ernment to prohibit it, in the premises, so far from being in its nature the counter |tart of, or logically connected with, the power to protect it, would be more aptly described as its opposite. The two may, like other dissimilar powers, coexist in the same hands, but can be by no means dependent on each other. One other objection to this mode is, that it would be a harsh use of power on the part of this Government, to repeal existing laws, if such there be, in these territories, prohibitory of slavery therein, or otherwise to interfere with the policy in this respect, present or future, of the inhabitants of them. Is not this objection rather plausible than substantial? On what principle of public law, or of public justice, sir, can the Mexican inhabitants of these provinces claim to exclude our institutions and forms of labor? I repeat it in no sense of idle tri umph or levity?we hare conquered and purchased them. And what, after all, is the nature and extent of the proposed interference with them r [i is, in effect, that in order to accommodate and serve certain conflicting interests among the proprietors of these domains, a particular form of labor be forbidden to enter certain portions of them and permitted to enter certain other portions of them, until the occasion for the formation of State co'nsti tutions shall arrive?that period when general causes shall have matured their judgments respect ivcly as to their more permanent wants?at which time the whole subject is, by the plan proposed, to pass into their own hands exclusively. Would it not be a stretch of sensibility itself to persevere in this objection ? And I must insist that the duty in this paititular goes along with the right. Justly, humanely, as I hope we sUa',1 act on this, on all occasions, it must still remain true that the first and highest obligation we owe is to the great body of the people of tin* Confederacy, in whom the true and subslan.i&l ownership of these territorial possessions lies. Perhaps the most inveterate objection to this plan is, that its application would divide the boundaries of California. And why, sir, is it, that the reception of California without terms, into thr Union, should he deemed irrcsistiblo? Is there an overwhelming necessity upon us to admit her, and without terms ? It has ever been agreed to by the most zealous defenders of popular sovereignty, that the supervision, by this Government, of th* boundaries of territorial applicants for membership in the Confederacy is, in all circumstances, but the performance of a plain duty. On the contrary, to admit California in her present circumstunccs with the modification proposed, even, is, manifestly, in the exercise of a discretionary authority to icnii-r great irregularities in her procedure. Meaning no disrespect to her, she can only be received on her present motion, by the generous forbeaiance ol the Government. And, sir, all the sources of that just jealousy of large States which haa ever characterized the lesser ones exist in the vast end various monopolies embiacjd jn the assumed limit* of this youthful and ambitious aspirant. Nat.onul reasons come tn to argue for a curtailment ol them?and, sectionally regarded, how easily may not the non-slaveholding States meet the policy ol the South in this particular. Tbey would rer tainly seem to believe that the effect of the partition proposed by this line would be to throw a | majority of chances for an additional free State into I their hnnds. To the South it would, however, ! extend the benefit of all those reasons which are i common to the Confederacy, and will, sectionally, j confer upon her an opportunity regarded as justly | demandable, and a right of value to her, of having the question of the suitableness to slave labor of the southern portion of California more deliberately tested than H has bsen. And with all due deferenca to contrary opinion*; I cannot think thai any argument* drawn fiom the simple inconvenience j* of it to California, and postponement to the Confederacy of those advantages anticipated from her j | immediate presence in it, ought to pievaii against; the mode of procedure m*v suggested to lite committee. Indeed, it may he well argued, that the proposed subjection of the hold, unprecedented, and hitherto unchecked movement* of California ! to the controlling jurisdiction of this Government ! in the manner proposed, while it wilt be free from ull just imputation of harshness, may he not wuhj out a certain salutary effect upon that sense of re-: ; I'ncct among the territories and people of the I Union for a necessary public authority, the im| porUrtTce of which hut increases wuh (he extension j and variety of the interests mid objocts of Govern I nient. | I pass now, Mr. Chairman, from the defence of > this measure ugainst certain prevalent objections, j to the presentation of n few of the leading arguments which have occurred to my hiiikI 111 its behalf. | Coming,as itdocs, fiom the slaveholding States, ' it has u strong claim on the justice of tiic mm-! , ! slaveholding States. Not to enlarge on a plain ! point, it m settled by the map tliut it lenders the i ( latter not only much the Urgent share of the prop-1 erty in dispute, but it assigns them a share very ! disproportionate to their greater numbers as com- | 1 pared with tlio.se of the bluveholding States?that | 1 share, too, it may be added, which includes the ! 1 most fruitful known sources of commerce, wealth, [ and population. Indeed, it would seem scarcely 1 allowable to predicate of cupidity itself, that it 1 Could go in quest of a plan of settlement fraught " with more extensive prospects of selfish aggrand- ( izement and gain. ' Sir, the proofs of existing, I fear, of increasing ' distrust ana alienation between the two classes of Slates that are now vainly seeking some common path of progress and peace in the threatening future, sufficiently admonish us of the value of some such mode of settlement, as, in view of certain prevalent qualities of human nature, is the precise one now in view. In 1820 a similar contest, involving then, as now, reciprocal jealousies of political sectional predominance, the same active animosity to slavery and alarms for both the security of the latter and the duration of the Union, which now exist, were merged in the remedy it is now proposed to, adopt. We are acting for the present,sir, on the theory ofa continuance ofthe Union?a Union so intricate and involved as to be capable of being perpetuated alone by a cement in which, whatever may be said of the cohesive power of the grosser inter- ' ests, sentiment of brotherhood and attachment 1 must, on known laws of the human mind, enter ) as component parts. The soldier remembers with ; affection and love his associate in arms, by their ' common participation in alike the perils and the de- ( liverances of the battle-field. If we ahull bear the ' burdens with which we ere again oppressed to 1 this, now national neutral ground of thirty-six ' degrees thirty minutes, may it not huven certain ' efleel for good in our future intercourse to have ' thus revived in this connection the memories of 1820 ? There is a certain moral appropriateness in tlu j proffered remedy to present evils. The reassertion of this line will, in the nature j of it, lend to check the progress of that headlong, j unrelenting, and, it may be added, unfeeling spirt I of evil which, whether we denominate it by one or another name, is the source of our present perplexities. It will in some degree stun Abolitionism, to arrest it at the precise point to which it had advanced thirty years ago and force it to feel, if feel it can, sir, that on full stretch of it3 present power it is not able to pass it. And what n tri- : umph for honorable minds who arc reluctantly j pushed forward, on the representative principle, in ( a line of political conduct here it were strange it i were not as unpleasant for them to pursue as it is injurious to the prosperity and harmony of the Union that it be pursued, to find that they have courage and strength to escape a responsibility for possible disasters which their ancestors, under I similar temptation and pressure, dared not incur. I In the precise degree and for the same reasons the | reaffirmance of this line will have the important j effect of restoring, in a good degree, the wavering ; confidence of the South in the justice of this Gov- | ernment and her ultimate security in the Union. Is it likely that we shall, by another mode, furnish j her so satisfactory proof that her relative strength 1 in the councils and defences of this Government | is not being dimin ished by the lapse of lime ? 1 press the inquiiy on those who, secure themselves, may be less capacitated to comprehend how others can be in danger, who, situated to fear no harm, may regard all fears of others as groundless, if it be not their sacred duty as it is their plain interest, to thus dispel, if possible, the grave apprehensions ; of one section and the distractions of the whole country ? This method has lesser advantages which should not be overlooked. It has the desirable qualities of simplicity and invariability. It requires little beyond the simple extension through a few de- j i'rees of latitude of one of its parallels already j deeply scored in the history of the Ilepub- j lie?one, the recorded testimony of which can ! never be obliterated however human passions may beat upon it?and which, if it cannot stay the aggressive tide of Abolitionism, can at least measure its progress and mark its ravages and its rr.sponsi biliiies. Again, Rir, so far as it is possible to ftt zonlcn\]tlaltd rtsutls by any plan within the compass of our power, it inny be alfirmed of this method that it possesses lhat faculty. Though nn act of legislation in its technical nature it haH, to some extent, the moral attributes and sanctions ol a contract. Viewed in this complex relation, it will serve to assure us, as best we may be assured, that what is designed by it relative to the condition of coming States will in due time transpire, it would have strength to pervade those vugue and common-place sentiments of opposition to, or regret of slavery, which really can be hardly said to oe peculiar to any one, much less to any section, and would probably be held to in the future by all except those anomalous few who, with ostensible ! consistency, betake themselves to the highest and ' holiest conceivable source of human obligations, 1 the Bible, to cover tjie nioet sturtling infidelity to engagements. Adopting it, then, may wc not hope that the States, slave, or non-slnveholding, which may be evolved from these territories by the lapse of time, will be received into the Confedei?cy on their application in terms of the Constitution, with no considerable opposition. This compromise is noip ptutnkd by thr South? ' the numerically weaker and only endangered sec-* lion. It is the oflering of a patriotic aiul enlightened body of men recently assembled to consider 1 of itnnd ita alternatives in one of our leading cities, NashviKe. It is shadowed forth, in not to be mistaken terms, in the pending debates. And I must 1 beg permission of the committee here to lay be- 1 fore them the sense on this point pf a meeting ol 1 the people in a pitmsuy eoieinbly in the city ol 1 Columbus, Georgia, a few days ago. Among certain resolutions adopted at that meeting 1 find the I following: 1 ' Tlmt in llic comproini on rl r Mi- - iiiri 'ine, solcmtity III ulc In (Wei.ii I In- iNorlli ami lie rmmli tlmly year* ago, 1 Ui<; Souili urri,?il?r<-i| tierrlgiit n> In.Id <lave property norili i of d-i" mi'?itmtvhe i* content m ..liuli- i>y tout line, extended j j to llie l'rfcirto, tail will Ink? no l?-?.-." I Ichvc out of view other embraced in f i I these icaolwljovx* !-*Vv"l n<*l to Use issue I ' before us. It can scarcely be important to guard | the committee against w hut wuuul he nn erroneous reading of the resolution ci ed. The rnembera ol this meeting cempubended better what was due to themselves than to send to this committee the apparent dictation of arbitrary ternra. Hence it is not said by (hem that they vyiU u*e nothing else than the Missouri compromise line. The ^nguuge is ti,?jf "Mill take nothing lets." The I fair constructionas I take it, is, that it was the I sense of that meeting that the South is not in circumstances to be aide to acquiesce 111 a settlement less favorable to her than would be the Missouri compromise line reapplied. And now, Mr. Chairman, as reluctant as 1 feel to a^lud? in complimentary terms to the virtues of any constituent of mine, I must take occasion to say that among the names subscribed to that resolution, are to be found those of three gentlemen who, in the two Houses of this Congress, have given to the country an order of talents and a degree of devotion to the prosperity and harmony of lha Union which nave brought them to be known and respected through- I out the States of it, while in respect to them all I (for it so happens, air, that I can speak with some I confidence on this point) no equal number of citi- I zens elsewhere can be found to excel them in a I just comprehension of the duties w? all owe to a ' t amnion government. 1 have said, sir, that this I compromise is offered now by the weaker party: I ihall it be construed to provoke the resentments of ' iride? It is rather to the more honorable emotions ' if that scntimcnTl now appeal, confessing that it h with some mortification that I feci constrained .o remind the force of numbers that it is n high ' neiogutivc of theirs to be able, justice and mod- : ration in view, to consult the terms of minorities. fVnd I know of no net by which this committee :oul<l more usefully to the Union, not to say more j racefuHy to themselves, attest that careful and musiderate respect for both the rights and apprc- , tensions of the exjiosed States?so befitting the ! imea?than to promptly accede to this hitherto i wice approved and now as ever moderate deinuftd n behalf of the South. Will we not thus proceed to jxeeute our duly, so long delayed, to pur dependirit provinces and merge tlje disputes which are icing so warmly, not to say harshly, waged ovci all those measures which have been hitherto sue- , jested for the same purpose? Especially, will ! hose to whom it is seen tk be so favorable?to whose acceptance it is teiuipred ? mid on whose | will its fate depends?incur tc*pou?ib?Ul.y of rejecting it ? I have not, Mr. Chairman, overlooked the fact hat this mode of scltleinepi leaves out of view he pending contest touching the boundary line of he present State of Xex<M und New Mexico. I iropose, for several reasons, to enter now a little nto that subject. Both the bill of the Senate? cported by its lately raised Cimmittee of Thirteen ?and that presented to this House by the able and lublic spirited chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, (Mr. McCi.xrnand,] provides 'or the affirmance to New Mexco, Texas consenting, if not only her capital and native scttlemehts, but smbracean additional cession if territory by Texas 0 this Government, in ponsitcration of a certain iccuniary equivalent to be pad in the extinguishnent of certain debts of Texas. This proposed session of territory is a measure which meets with much opposition from the Smth. I am not intensible, sir, of the delicacy o'our relations to the creditors of Texas, more especially to that class if them who held pledges of Texas, at the date if annexation, of the taxes deivabie from her customs, which, by her incorporation into this Union, were transferred to us. And am free to add that 1 shall cheerfully unite with others of the commit* ee in any proper effort that miy be made to provide for tnat class of claiim. Nay, I will go further, speaking for myself alone on this point, nv/l annmien Iim uritk urknt < a aw nww n??l ? aaul by the honorable member fron Tennessee, [Mr. Stanton.J in opposition to so extensive a cession oy Texas of her territory, add, that if the general character of any adjustment we may make Bhall be of n kind to mete out justice to the South, t shall reel something akin to surprise should she prove untractablein the matter of preserving to the ancient and now dependent province of New Mexico her capital and contiguous native settlements. Indeed, holding the consent of Texas i,t view always, and with trie connected object of disembarrassing the honor and good faith of a nation not only able to be just, but bound to set!ulously guard itB good name? 1 am free to say that should the exactions or intolerance of the non-alaveholding States coerce the sluveholding States into an extreme tenacity in respect of the threatened deprivation of New Mexico of her capital and contiguous settlements with a view to what they may deem paramount considerations of self-security, I can but reason that a heavier weight of responsibility will rest upon those who could have averted it. It would be more acceptable, then, doubtless, to the South generally that any payments we may feel called on to make the creditors of Texas, in view of our interposition bctvycen them and the resources to which they looked before annexation?now lost to them?rest on other grounds than the conveyance by her to us of the large portion of her territory proposed to be made. Sir, I take pleasure in announcing that I regard the simple matter of a few millions of money, be they more or less, as little, compared with the great and absorbing issues in hand?public justice?justice to others? justice to ourselves?and the final pacification, if it be practicable, of all complaints. Fanaticism and its guilt and folly expired, sir, and the once more concentrated genius and energies of the American people bent in united hopes on the elaboration of their stupendous resources, no mere pecuniary item in any just settlement we may make emi, by the in tensest degree of the nation's sensibility to expense, be felt. We can, too, well trust the security lvin? in the valuable and increasing nro ducts wnd to be felt in the beatings of the warm and American heart, of Texas, for repayment, in the swelling ratio of an " hundred-fold, for any amount which circumstances may render it proper for us to expend in this connection?while the generous caution, not to say magnanimity of the nation, will have been handsomely illustrated by a suitable general adjustment of all these kindred topics in which the particular provisions touching the claims of the creditors of Texas and the preservation from finul overthrow of an old and subdued province which the fortunes of war have placed in our power, shall be embraced. It will be seen, however, that 1 refer guardedly to these delicate topics?sufficiently distrustful of any sug gestions of mine respecting them?to the committee. I part from this feature in our public affairs with the confident hope, however, that if wesliail succeed in applying the terms of the Missouri compromise line to the territories west of the Rio Grande and disposing of the general subjects on hand in other respects suitably, we shall find the adjustment of the now threatening boundary question on terms satisfactory to all and creditable to the nation itself?not impracticable. It is useless, Mr. Chairman, to repeat, that, in the present posture of the public affairs, the different sections must be prepared to make respective sacrifices. The South, on the proposed basis, repeats the waiver of an opinion winch, whether well or ill-founded, concerns u substantial and highly important claim. Would it not be remarkable that she were not sanguine of her right?constitutional and otherwise?to go with her nccustomed property into ail parts of the public domain of the Union? She waives this right, on the basis now proposed, let it be remembered, and at a cost to her?all tilings considered?vastly disproportionate to any gain that can accrue to others by hei loss of it. It may be possibly inconvenient for, or, in a certain sense repugnant to, .white labor to mingle on the same theatre with slave labor?on the other hand, the privilege of expansion ia, in its nature, vital perhaps to the existence, certainly to the prosperity and the security of tfcc South. Yet, air, the opinion lias been expressed within a few days past, by well-informed members of this committee, that the Wilmot proviso or principle of ihc universal interdiction, by express mandate of this House, of slavery in all the territories on Irand, will be enacted the present session. The principle of the universal restriction of slaves to ihe siimc area in the bosom of the States holding ihem, to be asserted as a rule or postulate of Ke<T jrnl Councils ! 1 ask that the import and stress of juch n proposition be deliberately weighed. (lad it been acted upon from the beginning of the pressnt Oovernment only, in what a perilous if not ruinous strait, would not the more central slaveholding Stales of the Confederacy be thin day iredicamcnted. And, sir, it lias been said, in jusificntion of the policy now threatening ua of the tniversal territorial restriction of slavery, that without it the sUveholding States will be tempted o endanger the peace and character of the nation villi a view to extending the area of slate labor as an >bject. It has been objected, 1 am aware, by grave ind reflecting statesmen of the North, that the free 3intes are now being forcibly rendered, from tims 0 time, but subsidiary to the extension of slavery. 1 jring the argument with less reluctance into renew, for really, sir, 1 am conscious that such an )pinion is honestly entertained, North, by many, ind because I am not unconscious that there is a rerlain show of plausibility in it. Will gentlemen who urge this complaint view the subject from another point of observation i There is more truth ind utility, i apprehend, in the following presentation of it. That the dread of the anti-slavery encroachments of the *Yorth may have, in historical initancee, contributed to set in motion the instincts >f the eelf-prescrvation of the institution and brought them to put forth their secret energies x> escape the threatening grasp of a dreaded and awleas assailant, is too rational to be incredible. 1 know not, no one can know, exactly how that tas been. But it is plain that spasmodic and involuntary irruptions of the institution on contigu oua territories must under stress of threatened confinement be the natural expressions of the laws of its self-preservation?the only means, indeed, of escape from evils it is not ki the power of human courage to deliberately confront. And who, sir, is, or is to be responsible for this; and what, sir, is the propci and practicable remedy for the uneasy and so much complained of movement southward and westward of the institution? Let the Government of the Confederacy cease its unnatural war upon it and restore confidence in its security by taking it, to the extent of any power it has over it, under its protection and care, as it is, on the plainest principles of duty and interest, bound to do. This done, sir, and we shall cease to hear of wars gotten up at the South tn propagate slavery. 1 press this view on the counsels of northern statesmen. P.. ? - a- st si a > * uui iu nxui, (mi, iu uirc* inrcaicncu proviso, l rtliull notafl'ect to believe tbut it will pass thin body, even. Should it do so, however, it cannot fail to sink still lower the tone of southern confidence in the justice and self-control of this Government and embarrass, yet more, well-intended efforts to bring | the public dissensions to a favorable solution, i Should it, contrary to all hopes, become tho law of j the land, my desire uUt be to see those resolutions ichich have been so unanimously passed by the slaveholding Stalts to resist it put into complete and final execution. Can it be expected that the slavcholding States of this Union will submit to such action on the part of their commor^ government as not only degrades them from an original historical and a still conventional equality in it, but which in possible not to say probable contingencies, will be substantially impracticable from the very nature .of its terms? Repeal, or immediate resistance, at all hazards, should be the prompt and distinct reception South, as it seems to me, of such a measure. Sir, may we not hope that we shall have no such unjust and prescriptive procedure as would be this proviso; and that henceforth it will be remembered by the nation only with condemnation for the dissensions and mischief the appearance of it has already produced, and with a stern consciousness that it has been determinately and forever banished from the councils of the Government? This point made, sir, and it remains for the justice, the wisdom, not to say a certain timely caution, of numerical majorities, to adopt measures of adjustment suited to the various exigencies of the public affairs. There can be no exclusive claim, certainly, upon us of any one mode of reaching desired results. Is there another than the one under notice, which, while it will approximate justice and give satisfaction to half of the States of the Union, will exact less onerous terms of the residue? If bo, we owe it to each other to adopt it at once. I can but fear that neither of the.alternatives now in view is likely to prove to be such a measure. And here, sir, it may be allowable to remark, that to act wisely, we must bear in thought for whom wc are to act, and on what we are to act. Re&pect being had to the robust and high sense of rights wc are accustomed to regard as a fluttering characteristic of the people of these States?respect being had to the voluntary and unconstrained nature of their Union, at once its chief value and greatest ornament, we shall comprehend how it is that the very worst settlement of this sectional controversy, capable of being enforced, is that tchich would be with the greatest reluctance endured. We should bear in mind that alienation bv a law of the hu man mind follows on distrust and the sense of danger?and that alienation, final and complete? is the simple dissolution of the Union. And if, in the natural world, the strongest cord is broken by the parting of the several fibres of which it is composed, and the lenves ure freshly green on the branches of the tree, the root of which is cut by the fatal worm, we should be the more distrustful of that testimony, touching our true relations as confederates, which is furnished by the clumsy tests of occasional prejudiced or superficial observations. Sources of union so strictly intellectual and moral in their nature, may be sapped and dissolved, wc may reason, by covert and stealthy causes which the profouiulcst philosophy can only detect, but cannot with accuracy estimate. But our case is consolable. Wc hear it said that we may "part in pence," and so we may, sir. But will we, sir, part tn peace? Shall those who have proved themselves incapable of enjoying, in union, the most consummate prosperity and happiness ever alotted to n people since the birth of history, dissevered, endure in harmony and quiet, a thousand points of hourly and trying contact? No, sir; separated, the sword, looking to probabilities, will beat once the arbiter of justice and the punisher of wrong. And wc have, too, sir, nicely balanced estimates of our comparative powers of harming each other in a state of arigry separation. Aye, sir, we are all, North, South, liast and West, sufficiently potent for evil. Beyond a doubt, we may contrive to greatly damage each other. Let us have (he manliness and courage to not deceive ourselves. If wo are, iudeed, losing our present central point of political gravity, to swing off into new orbits of movement, wiihout desiring in the slightest degree to exaggerate the importance of our relations to | other nations, or to indulge the vain and mawkish ! sentimentality that the cause of free institutions is | in become extinct, as a consequence of any suicij dal folly of ours, it may be affirmed that Christen; dom will fc<l the shocks of our disiuembermcntI and the passing .shadows of the fragments of the Union fall on the disk of the political dial in every ! civilized country embraced within it. | If the object, then, be to perpetuate the Union in i which we iiavc so eminently and bo happily prospered, it ia the familiar dictate of common pru UtllUC I" OWUUJT Mi) C*^/WJCU jtUU CI IIU 111 HCli Ul testing its powers of endurance by presuming on the patience of its members, to strengthen tneir cohesion by conforming our action, as best we justly may, to (heir will. And if, too, the ideas of the age of human accountability be not all a fttlacy, sir?if there be nnything in memory woith being preserved, or in the prospects of the future which belongs to hope?if it he desirable to press on in tried and prospering ways rather than diverge into unknown and perilous paths?if unparalleled prosperity be preferable to novel, not to say portentous, experiments, feeling, sir, as I hope I do, a proper share of responsibility for whatever transpires here, i must say that there can bo no folly more stupendous than we shall have displayed?and, I am tempted to add, no guilt greater than will have been perpetrnted in our failure to effect a just and satisfactory determination of the existing issues. And does it not become those who?not to indulge reproaches?have brought into the Government the element which is endangering it and with whom circumstances have peculiarly lodged the remedy, to look well to the vast train of inexplorablc consequences and connected responsibilities which, in the event of the dissolution of the Union, lie in the rcvealings of the future history of the States which now compose it? It was well exclaimed, sir, by an able and eloquent member of this committee, [Mr. Toombb, of Georgia,] in discussing the mighty theme of the continuance or dissolution of this Union, on a previous day of our sittings, " When the day of retribution comes, let the aggressor Iromltlo " Rtil ctr I frtnnnt hut turn tn mnra encournging views of the future fortunes of our Republic. It is our duty, sir, to hope that the sense of the nation wil' rise above the mists which, for the present, obscure its reckonings, and quieting well-founded complaints, by removing the cause of them, recover its course of prosperity and peace. The Naitvoo Temple again Destroyed.?A fatality seems to attend the temple at Nauvoo. It was finished by the Mormons in 1843, was nearly destroyed by hre in ]H48, and on the27lh of May a tremendous hurricane demolished the trails.? The Irarian community of Socialists, under Cabtt, had purclmaed.it and were en^Hged in repairing it, with a view to fitting it lor schools, studying and meeting halls, and a great refectory fbr a thousand persons. The workmen were engaged on it, when the storm burst fbrth with such violence that the walls came tumbling down, and the workmen had to fly far their lives. Those walls that remained standing had to he pulled down. The surrounding btuldings were also demolished, and in the wash-house, where six Icarian women were washing, and there wm so sudden an inundation from the rising creek, that the women had to escape through the windows. The community are going to undertake the erection of another large and tipe building. From the Richmond Enquirer. " The Southern Press." Mk.shrs. Editors : I respectfully ask a place in I your pa|>er, briefly to replv<to your editorial rei marks in regard to the establishment of a Southern press in Washington. I seek no controversy | with you?a controversy in which a triumph j could afford me 110 pleasure. But, as one wno | advocated the establishment of the Southern j press, I feel aggrieved and wronged by yoyr edi! torial alluded to, and that 1 have a right to reply through the medium of your columns. You object to the new paper because it is sectional. Now you know that titers is a sectional warfare going on, which is agitating the whole country; and you know that in this warfare the leading politicians and presses of the North are thu aggressors. You will nt\t deny that all of the presses in Washington, the Union excepted, are Jxortneru in tlieir annulies ni[u influences; and,in nil fairness and cnndor, you inust admit thnt even the Union falls short of doing full justice to the South. 1 say this, without moaning to censure the Editors of that paper for tltus fuiluig to do full justice to the South; for I am free to say, that it would be unreasonable to expect them, while conducting a Nutional Democratic organ, and bound as they are, by contract, to give full reports of the proceedings of the Senate, to devote their columns mainly to the defence of Southern opinions, and Southern rights and interests. In their present position they could not do so if they would?that they do not even uttempt it is a matter of notoriety, for they scurcely give even u sketch of the debates in the House of Representatives; nnd their columns would not furnish space enouajpto admit IVill and (hir replications to the pondiwus letters and editorials which they are putting forth in laudation of Mr. Clay's Adjustment, and in condemnation of those who oppose it. Now, sirs, I appeal to your candor and sense of justice, to answer whether, under such circumstances, Southern Senators and Representatives are blameable for calling upon their constituency to sustain an independent press at the seat of government, devoted to the maintenance and support of Southern rights nnd interests? Is it not unkind?is it not unjust, to hold out the idea to the people, thnt the new paper is to be solely the organ of Members of Congress? Allow me to say, that your strictures on this point, cut as deeply upon the Enquirer, the Union, or any other paper, pledged and devoted to any principle or purpose, as they rut upon the new [taper or its friends. For, I presume it will not he denied that all political papers are more or less under the influence of tliose who support them, or are in any way identified with them. Nor will it be denied, that they exert an influence upon the masses who read them. IJut, sirs, with all due respect, let me call upon you to view the other side of the picture?and to make it more glaring, I appeal to facts as they stand. Southern members of Congress have had abundant means of Knowing 1110 scnilllicms 01 mvir coiiBuiuriiiri, ill I regnrd to the questions now before tliem?for | those sentiments have been again and again expressed, and ratified in the most indubitable I fbrins. They nre called upon by certain Editors, backed by certain letter-writers, to support a tissue of measures, called nn Adjustment, which, most of them think, is directly at war with the principles and pledges upon which they were elected, and degrading to their constituents. Now, sir, shall Senators and Representatives yield their own opinions?violate tlieir pledges as tliey understand them, and follow the advice?not to Nay yield to the diclution of those Editors ? That is the question. You Hay " you do not think members of Congress should have any control over the political press." For the salfe of argument let that be granted. 1 ask in return, ought any political press to control members of Congress? \our intelligent readers may answer that qestion. The people may decide whether ths^ representatives arc to look to them for countenance and support? or to editors and letter-writers about Washington. It gives me pain, thus to write. But it is neither fair nor just to assail Senators and Representatives, fordoing what they clearly have a right to do?what, indeed, they fee I solemnly bound to do. They have a right to appeal from the judgment of editors and letter-writers?to the judgment of their constituents. Feeling that they are unjustly assailed for conforming to their representative obligations, tliey have a right to call upon their constituents to get up and keep up an itlependent press to defend Southern rights, against Northern aggression. For doing this, you charge them with getting up a sectionul party organization. It is no party organization, that is aimed at. No such tldng. But even if such was the case, are Southern members to be held responsible for it? Is there no sectional party organiza lion in tlie North against the South? Is it not known to everybody that this Northern sectional organization, with its presses in the North, and presses in alliance with them at the seut of government, has attained a controlling influence I over the Federal Government? All this is notorious. And even if ihe Washington Union was thoroughly devoted to the cause of the South, under such uircumstanees, would it be an unpardonable sin to establish another paper devoted to the same cause? I I, sirs, front the days of my boyhood have been a rentier of the Enquirer, when the Senior ! Editor of the Union conducted it?and since he came to Washington, 1 have continued to be one of his constant readers. And although, upon several trying emergencies, we have widely differed, 1 have never yet desired to see his paper go down. Never. In times of excitement, when the whole country is agitated almost to distraction, by questions involving the weal or woe of the body politic, it is difficult to uvoid harsh expressions between those enlisted on different sides of these questions. If the Washington Union can find just cause of complaint for certain expressions uttered by the getters up of the Southern Press, the latter will find no difficulty in settling the account, by pointing to harsh censures, nick-names, insinuations?not to say threats, to he found in the columns of the Union. Let all thnt pass, (f I can help it, no unkind feeling shall he allowed to rnnkle long in my bosom. I jlrop this I topic, and, in conclusion, would respectfully suggest, that those who consider the new press us necessarily tending to break down the Washington Union, and with it the Democratic party, err most cgregiously. If any such consequences ensue, tnc fnult will not be with the friends of the new paper, hut with those who choose to consider and treat them as enemies. The truth is, that the natural tendency of such a paper, ably and faith fully conducted, will be to strengthen the National Democratic orgitn?for the plain reason that the Federal organs in the city are not only Federal, but Mrlhem in their affinities?whereas the Democratic organ, in a faithful advocacy of Democratic doctrines, would, as a matter of course, bear a character more congenial with Southern rights and institutions, whilst it would, to a great extent, be relieved from the responsibility and trouble of devoting its columns inainly to mere sectional questions. Hut , as mutters now stand, the fact is as lamentable as it is undeniable, that the Northern portion of the national Democratic party, with a few honorable exceptions, are tainled with abolitionism and freesoilism?or, they are uttderabolition and fVee soil pledges to such an extent that it is utterly impossible that any paper, conducted as a national Democratic orgun, can treat them as Democrats and do full justice to the South. It is needless to pretend it, it is utterly impracticable. The Southern Democracy constitute a large hiajority of the Democratic party, and it ought not, in sheer justice, to be expected that their principles, their rights, yea, their peace and safety, shall be surrendered to ^pnense those so tainted or under such pledges. They have a right to call upon all such to shake off their untislavery shackles and come back to their true Democratic position, so that there may no longer be any distinction between Democrats North and Democrats fiouth. But, no long as the great mass of all parties North are so tainted, a talented and fearless Southern press must be sustained and must defend Southern rights and institutions, without fear, ftivor or affection towards anv party. A Friend to the New Press. June 20, 1850. [We had no desire to do injustice in our former article, we therefore cheerfully give place to the above explanation. Though the writer ehede "The Southern Press,"?Tri weekly, U published on Tuesdays. Thursday* and Saturdays of each week. "The Southern Preia,"?Weekly, Is published every Wednesday. 1 ADVERTISING RATES. 1 For ono square of 10 lines, three insertions, j)l 00 I " every subsequent insertion, - - IS Liberal deductions made on yearly advertising. Sif- Individuals may forward the amount of their subscriptions at our risk. Address, (post-paid) ELL,WOOD FISHER, Washington City. I - a l HSgSSBEgggg I ILL. ? .wine new iiKiii on me subject, we confess our original views urc unshaken. We have no desire, however, to continue the discussion. We hope that we may be mistaken, und that the enterprise may do good to the cause of the Constitution, the South, and the Union. If we know ourselves, we have no other object in view.? Richmond Enquirer.] Mr. Stanly. This gentleman made a little speech, on Saturday lust, not two inches long, but which enables us to mark hint as u champion of the North, as certainly as if he had spoken an hour for the Wilmot Proviso. The penduyr Question was Mr. Inge's amendment declarfl^ that the people of any portion of the public territory, "when assembled in Convention, in pursuance of constitutional authority, to frame a State constitution, have the right to adopt or exclude African slavery," Ac. Mr. Stanlv renewed the amendment, to say a single word. He did not wish to discuss the Amendment of the gentleman from Alabama at , all, but merely to call attention to a particular part of that amendment, viz: the words "in pursuance of constitutional authority." The gentleman had very shrewdly drawn his amendment, so as that the committee, if they sustained it, would in effect declare that California was doing wrong in asking to be admitted at this time. If they voted in the gentleman's amendment, they voted California out. He did not wish to say any thing more. He withdrew the amendment. And so the representative of a large slnveholding district is unwilling to affirm a political truth, vitally essentia] to the protection of the slave States, lest it should condemn the course of California ! Such is his anxiety to admit her into the Union, that he would sacrifice for it a solemn surrender to the North of its old ground of the Missouri restriction. Whig or Democrat, we impeach the loyalty of any Southern man who trifles thus with the interests of his people.?Riah. Times. MISCELLANEOUS. A Word to the Ladies.?Mv> Mode of making Bread.?Our readers may remember the notice we gave of the bread-making machine of Dr. Lewis, exhibited at the late Fair of the Mechanics' Institute. Having been favored by the Doctor with a recipe we (that is, wife, self, and a couple of friends in family council,) concluded to iry the experiment of bread-making on the new plan. The first two attempts were failures; but the third was triumphant success, and since then we have had breau not to be eaualled by the bakers,? light, moist, sweet, free from the mixture of sour and bitter usually found in fermented bread. Here is the recipe for a good-sized loaf, large enough to fill a common bread-pan : Take three pounds of flour; mix with it three teoapoonfula of soda, passing the whole through a seive, in order that the soda may be well mixed with the flour; to one quart of water add a teasoonful of muriatic acid in the liquid form; pour the mixture into the flour, and mix the whole just enough to get the ingredients fuirly incorporated. Wet the hand in cold, water und mould the loaf together into shape, clap it at once into the oven, and during the cooking of any ineal, with five minutes' labor, you can have excellent ibread/ The soda and acid constitute the elements ot common salt, and they not only raise the breal by combination, hut salt it into the burgain. Tmr the experiment, ladies! \ The "London Times."?Some interesting statistics, relative to the printing of the Times, were mentioned in a paper on printing machines, read by Mr. Edward Cowper, at tne Institution of Civil Engineers. On the 7th of May, 1850, the Times and Supplement contained 72 columns, or 17,500 lines, made up of upward of a million pieces of type, of which matter about two-fifths were written, composed and corrected after 7 o'clock in the evening. The Supplement was sent to press nt 7.50 P. M., the first form of the paper at 4.15 A. M., and the second fbrm at 4.44 A. M.; on this occasion, 7,000 papers were published before G.15 A. M. 21,000 papers before 7.30 A. M., and 34,000 before 8.45 A. M., or in about 4 hours. The greatest number of copies ever printed in one day was 54,000, and the greatest quantity of printing in one day's publication was on the 1st of March, 1848, when the paper used weighed 7 tons, the weight usually required being 4i tons; the surface to be printed every night, including the supplement, was 30 acres; the weight of the font of type in constant use was 7 tons; and 110 compositors, and 25 pressmen were constantly employed. Firemen worse than the Fire.?During a recent alurm of fire in Philadelphia, a watchman, who was hastening to the scene of conflagration, shouting "Fire! hi-cr-r-r.'us he went, encountered a pale, respectable looking gentleman, who, by his manner betrayed much trepidation. . " Where? where is it sir?" demanded the nervous gentleman. "There, sir, there! right at the corner of Sixth and Lombard .' Fi-rr-r- /" added the watchman, as he was about logo. "Where, sir?which way?" " There," said the watchman, pointing in the direction, while the mun breuthed a faint "thank you," and turned auickly towards Market-street. "Stop!" said tlie watchman, "you're going right the wrong way ! This way's the fire!" "Oh,d?n the fire," said the stranger; "it's your firemen that I wunt to keep out of the reach of." Ami away he went, as if all the Killers and Smashers in the city had been at his heels. The gentleman was a stranger in the city, but he was in the habit of Pending the newspapers. Intf.restivo Relics.?On the occasion of laying the corner stone of the Washington Monument, at Richmond, Robert G. Scott, Esq., the orator of the day, unfolded a garment of the finest texture, which " the wind carried out'upnn its bosom as if it had been silk." " This," said Mr. Scott, " is the blanket in which General Washington, when in infant, was wrapped up on his being baptized into the Churcn of Christ." " Here, too," said the speaker, holding ur> the insignia which were in his hands, " here is the Masonic scarf and apron, made at La Grange by Madame de Laftiyette, and presented by General Lafiiyette to his Masonic brother General Washington, and worn by him when officiating as Master of a Lodge in Alexandria."?Many other objects of interest connected with the war were presented and incidents , elated. Transatlantic Steamers.?The Postmaster General has issued a notice to the public, and to Postmasters, stating the schedule of time for the departure of Collins'a American mail steamers as follows: from new torn. from liverpool. Atlantic; J??ne 15 Pacific, June 19 Pacific,; July b Atlantic July 10 Atlantic, July 27 Pacific, July 31 The Mr.THODisT Church.?According to a itntcmeiit recently made, the Methodist Episcopal I Ciiuvcbf South, hiw had an increase during the /wist year of 12,595 members, 58 travelling preachers, and 827 local preachers. The whole number of travelling in 1,642, of whom 904 are superannuated: local preachers 3,892; members 366,582 whites; 184,722 colored; 3,226 Indians. Total, 504,530. _ Emigration.?A gentleman just from St. JoI soph's says, that the emigration that has passed through that place this season amounts to at least 30,000 persons. Including St. Joseph, Independence, Kansas, and otherplaces, there have passed over what it called the Missouri route, in all, about 70,000 persons. Louis Philippe.? Isaac Mickle, Esq., of Camden, New Jersey, has received a letter from Louis Philippe, ex-King of France, in which he takes occasion to deny that he ever taught school in Haddonfield, New Jersey, or ever went by any other name than that of Orleans when in the United States. __ Fattening Poults*.?Coop up poultry to fatten, and they will do well up to twelve or fburj teen days. Keen them in the coops beyond that time, and feed tnem as much as you like, they will grow leaner every dayuqtil they ctow a skin? Ail or bones, and die.