Book Description

Excerpt from Speeches of Hon. William H. Seward and Hon. Lewis Cass, on the Subject of Slavery: Delivered in the Senate of the United States, March, 1850 They are, therefore, not more unfortunate in their own proper condition than fruitful in dangers to the present Democracy. California then acted wisely and well in establishing self-government. She deserves not rebuke, but praise and admiration. Nor does this objection come with a good grace from those who offer it. If California were now content to receive only a territorial charter, we could not agree to grant it without an inhibition of slavery which in that case being a federal act, would render the attitude of California as a territory even more offensive to those who now repel her, than she is as a State, with the same inhibition in the Constitution of her own voluntary choice. The second objection is that California has assigned her own boundaries, without the previous authority of Congress. But she was left to organize herself, without any boundaries fixed by previous law. or by prescription. She was obliged, therefore, to assume boundaries, since without boundries she must have remained unorganized. A third objection is, that California is too large. I answer; first, there is no common standard of States. California, though greater than many, is less than one of the States. Second, California if too large, may be divided with her own consent, which is all the security we have for reducing the magnitude and averting the preponderance of Texas. Thirdly, the boundaries of California seem not at all unnatural. The territory circumscribed is altogether contiguous and compact. Fourth, the boundaries are convenient. They embrace only inhabited portions of the country, commercially connected with the port of San Francisco. No one has pretended to offer boundaries more in harmony with the physical outlines of the region concerned, or more convenient for civil administration. But to draw closer to the question, what shall be the boundaries of a new State, concerns, first, the State herself, (and California, of course, is content;) secondly, adjacent communities - Oregon does not complain of encroachment, and there is no other adjacent community to complain; - thirdly, the other States of the Union. The larger the Pacific States, the smaller will be their relative power in the Senate. All the States now here are Atlantic States and inland States, and surely they may well indulge California in the largest liberty of boundaries. The fourth objection to the admission of California is, that no previous census had been taken and no laws prescribing the qualifications of suffrage and apportionment of Representatives in Convention existed. I answer, California was left to act ab initio. She must begin somewhere without a census and without such laws. The Pilgrim Fathers began in the same way on board the Mayflower; and since it is objected that some of the electors in California may have been aliens, I add that the Pilgrim Fathers were aliens and strangers to the Commonwealth of Plymouth. Again, the objection may well be waived if the Constitution of California is satisfactory, first, to herself, and, secondly, to the United States. As regards the first of these, not a murmur of discontent has followed California to this place; and, as to ourselves, we confine our inquiries about the Constitution of a new State to four things: First, the boundaries assumed, and I have considered that point in this case already. Second, that the domain in the State has accrued to us - and it is admitted that this has been properly done. Third, That the Government shall be republican, and not aristocratic or monarchical. In this case the only objection is that the constitution, inasmuch as it inhibits slavery, is altogether too republican. Fourth, That the representation claimed shall be just and equal. No one denies that the population of Californi.