constitution, and subversive of the entire fabric of our political institutions? The next great constitutional principle on which he relied, is that of equality between the States, and non-discrimination on the part of this Government between the States, in reference to their domestic institutions, which applies to the legislation over this district and the territories, as well as to the States themselves. To suppress the domestic institution of slavery in this district, or in territories where it may exist, would be directly contrary to the equality between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding States as members of the Union, and injurious and insulting to the former, and a palpable violation of one of the great fundamental principles of our system. He held it as incontrovertible, that no member of this body, whatever may be his private opinions as to the character of the domestic institutions of any of the States, had, acting in his official character, any right whatever to discriminate between that of one section and another, to the prejudice of either, in reference to their peculiar institutions. All are to be equally regarded and respected. The opposite course would destroy all equality between the different members of the Confederacy, would sow the seeds of discord, and, in the end, destroy the Union itself.

These two great principles, non-interference and nondiscrimination, are, as he has often said, the basis of his resolutions; and they comprehended all, district and territories, as well as the States themselves. These were broad, and deeply seated in the constitution, and no member has ventured to deny them. Our salvation depended on preserving them inviolate. These, he would repeat, were the high constitutional grounds assumed in his fifth resolution, which had been surrendered for inexpediency! The Senator from Kentucky tells us, if we should meet the abolitionists on these grounds, we must come to a direct issue. That is what he desired. He sought a plain and direct issue on constitutional princi

ples, not with them, but with this body; and such an issue was the only safe and solid gronnd on which the Senators even from the non-slaveholding States can meet abolition at home. The Senator from Michigan (Mr. Norvell) has boldly and nobly told you that it is the only ground on which he can meet it, and that if you should substitute inexpediency for the constitution, you would compel him to go against the resolution. The Senator is right. The constitution-no interference-no discrimination. These are the grounds on which the battle may be safely fought. You must tell these deluded fanatics, you have no right to intermeddle in any form or shape, and that while you accuse others of sin and immorality, you yourselves are guilty of both in such intermeddling. Inexpediency! Think of the folly of attempting to resist the powerful impulses that urge them on to the work of destruction with so feeble a word! You might as well think of extinguishing a conflagration that mounted to the clouds, by throwing a bucket of water on it. Expediency, concession, compromise! Away with such weakness and folly! Right, justice, plighted faith, and the constitution: these, and these only, can be relied on to avert conflict. These have been surrendered for "inexpediency!"

He was not satisfied with the explanation which the Senator from Kentucky gave, why the amendment should be limited to Florida. He says, that many of these fanatics are so ignorant, that they are not aware of the fact, that Florida is the only slaveholding territory. If such be the case, how idle would be the whole scheme of the Senator to meet them with arguments! But, badly as he thought of them, he did not think the Senator had done them justice. They were indeed blind and deluded in their warfare on our institutions; but on all other subjects, many of them were as intelligent as the rest of the community, and know as well as he and the Senator how many territories we had, and that Florida was the only one with a slave population. On this point

they knew perfectly what they were about; and in praying that slavery might be abolished in the territories, they intended to establish a general principle, not only that it should be abolished in Florida, where it exists, but that hereafter no territory should be created in which it should not be prohibited. This was clearly their intention; and when the Senator limits it to Florida, he declines to meet this broad issue, and virtually surrenders the whole ground, except Florida, to the abolitionists. One of his leading objects, as he has often said, in moving these resolutions, was to ask the Senate to define its position, in order that his constituents and the world might know what ground this body intends to occupy. He asked none to vote against his judgment or inclination, but to say distinctly by his vote what he intends. If it be intended, then, to surrender all constitutional grounds as to the territories, and place their protection on the ground. of inexpediency, and to surrender all territories hereafter to be created, without even the poor protection of this feeble word, vote for the resolution as amended. As to himself, he would give no such vote. He never would consent to place our rights on such frail foundation. He stood on the constitution on the great principles of non-interference and non-discrimination, and he never would surrender them, and put the question on mere inexpediency. He would leave those who took different views to decide on the resolution as amended, as they might think proper. He would take no part in it, one way or the other.

[Mr. Clay here modified his amendment, on the suggestion of Mr. Hubbard; the most important part of which modification related to the implied breach of faith, by abolition, with citizens who, with their slaves, settle in the United States territories.]

Mr. Calhoun said, he believed the Senator from New Hampshire was willing to go as far as he possibly could in But Mr. C. had set out in this discussion, with

this course.

the determination to yield or recognize neither the right of interference, nor of discrimination. But this amendment would yield it, or, at best, it did not assert the contrary right. Mr. C. would neither oppose it nor vote for it; perhaps it was the strongest that could be had, and if so, let it pass. What Mr. C. wanted was, that the Government-the common agent of the States, should define their position, and that the Northern States should be declared to have no right to look into or judge of Southern institutions, or to legislate in relation to them on any ground.

[Mr. Rives, after some remarks, moved to strike out the proposed amendment after the word "Resolved," and insert the following as a substitute:

"That any interference with the subject of slavery in the territories of the United States, in which it may exist, is inhibited by all the considerations in regard to the rights and interests of the inhabitants of the said territories, the security of the slaveholding States, and the danger of the Union, which are mentioned in the preceding resolution as forbidding any interference with, or action on, the subject of slavery in the District of Columbia; and for the further reason that the people of the territories, when admitted into the Union, as States, will be exclusively entitled to decide the question of the existence of slavery, within their respective limits, for themselves."]

Mr. Calhoun said that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives) appeared not to be pleased with his determination not to vote for the resolution as it now stood amended. He (Mr. Calhoun) complained of no Senator's course, and none had a right to complain of his. We are acting on a great and dangerous subject; one which will long agitate this country, and have a decided influence on its future destiny. He, for one, was determined throughout to occupy the ground which his judgment and conscience dictated; and he expected and desired others to do the same. At the outset, he stated that he was prepared to modify his resolutions, so as to make them acceptable, as far as he could, without sacrificing the principles on which they rested. These were, as

he had frequently stated, non-interference and non-discrimination, which, in his opinion, could not be abandoned at any point, without a sacrifice of the rights and safety of the South; and, under this impression, he had constantly resisted every attempt to induce him to surrender them.

The Senator seemed to think that he had not, in his fifth resolution, taken constitutional ground. He thought differently; that he had taken the highest and strongest constitutional ground in declaring that interference with slavery in this district, or the territories was a direct (yes, he would repeat an epithet he had yielded to reconcile the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Crittenden) and dangerous attack on the domestic institutions of all the States; as direct and as dangerous as an interference with slavery in one, would be an interference in all the other slaveholding States; thus placing slavery here, and in the territories, under the same constitutional protection as in the States themselves. He would have added the additional ground, which the Senator had so well explained, and in which he entirely concurred, but he knew that the sense of the body had already been tested in relation to it, and that we of the South were in a minority on it; and his object was to place it on constitutional grounds, still higher and stronger, if possible, and on which he had hoped there would be greater unanimity. As to voting for a resolution placing the question on the ground of inexpediency, the Senators from Virginia and Mississippi must excuse him. He believed it would be fallacious and dangerous, and neither his judgment nor sense of duty would permit him to give it his vote. If we place the question there, we will be overpowered. The whole North, with little exception, would be united against us, and we would be voted down in both Houses, in less than two years; and that on a ground which would not justify the South in taking the remedy into her own hands.

The amendment offered by the Senator from Virginia,

VOL. III.-13