exerted to induce Mexico to enter into a satisfactory arrangement with us. I cannot doubt that, under the influence of these powerful causes, with a little forbearance and prudence on our part, all the causes of difference between the two countries would, ere this, have been settled by a treaty satisfactory to both. [FEBRUARY, 1847. It is true Mexico claimed the whole of Texas; but it is equally true that she recognized the difference, and showed a disposition to act upon it, between the country known as Texas proper and the country between it and the Del Norte. It is also true that we and Texas recognized the same difference, and that both regarded the boundary as unsettled, as the resolution of annexation, which provides that the boundary between Texas and Mexico shall be determined by the United States, clearly shows. It is worthy of remark in this connection, that this provision in the joint resolution is understood to have been inserted in consequence of the ground taken at the preceding session by the Senator from Missouri on the discussion of the treaty, that the Nueces was the western boundary of Texas, and that to extend that boundary to the Rio del Norte would take in part of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, and New Mexico. What, then, ought to have been the course of the Executive after annexation under this resolution? The very one which they at first pursued,-to restrict the position of our troops to the country actually occupied by Texas at the period of annexation. All beyond, as far as the Executive was concerned, ought to have An opposite course was, however, unfortunately taken; both negotiations were pushed at the same time, and that with Mexico, with as much zeal, and as strong a pressure, as that with England. The then President of the republic of Mexico (Herrera) was friendly to the United States, and anxiously disposed, on that account, as well as others, to settle the differences with us. Acting under these feelings, he acceded to the proposition to receive a commissioner, without duly reflecting, as the events proved, on these great impediments in the minds of the Mexicans against treating with us. The result was as might have been anticipated. Paredes took advantage of the error, and hurled Herrera from power; and the effect of this premature attempt at opening negotiation, was to overthrow a friend and place an enemy in power, deeply committed against settling the differences between the two countries, and thereby—as ought to have been fore-been regarded as subject to the provisions of seen-greatly to increase the difficulty of any future settlement of the questions. What followed from this unfortunate step, until it ended in war between the two countries, has been so clearly traced by the Senator from Maine, as to supersede the necessity of my touching upon it. The overlooking of the intimate connection of these two questions was not only the first link in that series of causes which finally terminated in this war, but it came near preventing the settlement of the Oregon question. Had the action of Congress, which finally led to the settlement of the Oregon question, been delayed until it was known that skirmishes had taken place between our forces and the Mexicans on the Rio Grande, (but a short period,) there is every reason to believe the Oregon question would not have been closed. I speak upon high authority,-the escape was a narrow one. Fortunately, the British Government promptly acted upon the notice, and tendered a proposition to our Minister on which the settlement was finally made, which he received and forwarded to our Government but a few days before news was received in England of the skirmishes on the Rio Grande. But while they fortunately occurred too late to prevent a settlement of the Oregon question, they unfortunately occurred too soon to preserve peace with Mexico. But if the policy which the Administration first adopted after annexation had been pursued, to occupy the frontier of Texas with our military forces to the extent of country which she held at the time of annexation, and no further, there is every reason to believe that on the settlement of the Oregon question the peace of the two countries would have been preserved. the resolutions, which authorized the Government to settle the boundary. There are but two modes of settling a disputed boundaryone by the joint consent of both parties, that is, by treaty, of which the President and the Senate are the organs; the other, by the determination of one of the parties for itself, after failing to obtain the consent of the other, and that, under our Government, can only be done by Congress. Indeed, when we speak of our Government, it is understood to mean Congress and the Executive, acting jointly-the one by passing an act or resolution, and the other by its approval. And in Congress, taken in this sense, all discretionary power under our system of Government is invested. It is only by this power that a disputed boundary can be deterinined by the Government for itself, and without the consent of the other party. The President had no more right to determine on his own will what the boundary was than I had, or any other Senator. Such, indeed, appeared to be the conviction of the President himself. It is only on such a supposition that we can explain his course in attempting to open a negotiation with Mexico, with a view of settling all differences between the two countries, among which the settlement of the boundary was considered a paramount question. Why negotiate, if it were not an unsettled question? Why negotiate, if the Rio del Norte-is, as it was afterwards assumed-was the clear and unquestionable boundary? And if not, upon what authority, after the attempt to open negotiation had failed, could he determine what was the boundary, viewing it as an open question? Was it not his plain duty, on such an occurrence, to submit the question to Congress, which was FEBRUARY, 1847.] The Three Million Bill. then in session, and in whom the right of establishing the boundary and declaring war was clearly invested? Had that course been adopted, I greatly mistake if the sense of this body would not have been decidedly opposed to taking any step which would have involved the two countries in war. Indeed, I feel a strong conviction, that if the Senate had been left free to decide on the question, not onethird of the body would have been found in favor of war. As it was, a large majority felt themselves compelled, as they believed, to vote for the bill recognizing the existence of war, in order to raise the supplies of men and money necessary to rescue the army under General Taylor, on the Del Norte, from the dangers to which it was exposed. But to bring the matter home, the Senator himself is in no small degree responsible for the war. I intend no attack on him. I have made none, and will make none. The relations between him and myself, personal and political, have long been such, that self-respect and a sense of propriety forbid my alluding to him, except when unavoidable, and then in a courteous manner; and I now allude to his course only because it is necessary to explain mine, and the motives which governed me on the occasion. The Senate will remember, that when the President's Message was received recommending Congress to recognize that a war existed between us and Mexico, and to raise the necessary means for its prosecution, the Senator from Mississippi, whose seat is immediately on my right, but who is now absent, (Mr. SPEIGHT,) moved to print twenty thousand copies of the Message and documents. The scene was a solemn one, and what occurred will long be remembered by the members of the body. I rose and objected; and said that we were on the eve of great events, and expressed my hope that we would proceed calmly and deliberately. I suggested that the printing of so large a number of copies would be construed into an endorsement of the Message; adding, that I was unwilling either to endorse or condemn, until the Message and documents were printed, and carefully perused by me. A debate ensued, and the Journals of the Senate will show what took place. The Senator from Missouri was the individual who made the discreet and appropriate motion to separate the recommendations of the Message into two parts, and refer that which related to recognizing the existence of war to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and that which related to the raising of men and supplies, to the Committee on Military Affairs, of which he was chairman. The latter, it was expected, would report immediate measures for the support of General Taylor. I seconded the motion, and it was carried by a large majority. I saw in it that which gave me hope, and that I should be able to effect the object I had in view, and which I will hereafter explain. [29TH CONG. The House of Representatives acted with much more precipitancy; it passed a bill the very day the Message was received, recognizing the existence of the war, and providing means for its prosecution. It was late in the evening when it passed the House, and I am of the impression that the Senate had adjourned; and it was not reported to it that day; but be that as it may, the next day the Senator, as chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, reported the bill to the Senate as it came from the House, with both provisions in it; directly contrary to the order of the Senate, made on his own motion, to refer the part of the Message relating to the recognition of war to the Committee on Foreign Relations. To that, and the fact that a caucus had been held of the party which agreed to sustain the report, may be traced the precipitate (to use no stronger word) action of the Senate, and the recognition of the war. It emphatically made the war. Had the order of the Senate been respected—had the Senator from Missouri, in conformity with it, and as he was in duty bound to do, moved to strike out all that related to the recognition of the war, and referred it to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and confined his report to raising the necessary means of rescuing General Taylor and his army from the pressing dangers which surrounded them, the possibility is, that the war might have been averted, and the two countries at this day have been at peace. Sir, I say possibility, because, even then, after the skirmishes between our forces had occurred, I did not despair of escaping war, if sufficient firmness and prudence were used on the part of this body. I had deeply reflected on the subject in advance, and great as were the difficulties, I still saw a gleam of hope. The intelligence of the skirmishes on the Rio Grande was received here on Saturday. I at once saw the danger, and turned my mind to the subject. I anticipated that a Message would be received on Monday from the Executive, and formed not an incorrect opinion as to what would be its character. Casting my eyes over the whole, with a view of avoiding war, I came to the conclusion in my own mind, what course was best to effect that object. Next morning I communicated the conclusions to which I had come to two of my colleagues, who were boarding with me; I said to them, that there was but one way of escaping war, but I am not certain that it would be successful. It will, however, place us in the chapter of accidents, and thereby afford a possibility of escape. I was asked what it was, and replied, that it depended on separating the question of war from that which relates to the rescuing of General Taylor and his forces. Let the means necessary for the latter be immediately granted, but let time be taken for due and deliberate consideration of the former. Had that been done, it was my intention to throw my whole weight against the immediate declaration or recognition of war; treating what had occurred as mere hostilities between the two armies, without authority of the Congress-the warmaking power of either Government. We had not a particle of evidence then, or even now, that the Republic of Mexico had made war against the United States. Indeed, we are in the anomalous condition of the two countries being at war during and almost an entire year, without either having declared it, although the constitutions of both expressly provide that Congress shall declare war. Instead, then, of recognizing war, I would have taken the very opposite ground-that what had occurred was mere hostilities, and not war, as the Congress of Mexico had not author. ized it. To provide for the contingency of the Congress of Mexico approving of what had occurred, and refusing to treat for the settlement of our difficulties, I would have advised the raising of ample provisional force, to be collected at some convenient and healthy point, where they could be trained during the interval, and be fully prepared to meet such decision; but even in case such decision should be made, instead of advising a formal declaration of war, I would have advised, as General Jackson recommended, giving authority to the Executive to make reprisals for seizing and holding such portion of the Mexican territory as would | afford ample indemnity, to be retained until the differences between the two countries were settled; but, in the mean time, would have taken measures to repel the attacks made upon our army by the Mexican forces, and to drive them far beyond the limits of our borders. Had this course been pursued, we should have had all the glory and reputation of the two brilliant victories at Palo Alto and Resaca MONDAY, March 1. [MARCH, 1847. Three Million Bill-Mr. Upham's Amendment-Ordinance of 1784 and 1787-Their Origin, and how Passed-Transcript from the Journals of the Congress of the Confederation. Mr. UPHAM rose and moved an amendment, to come in as a second section, as follows: SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any territory which shall hereafter be acquired or be annexed to the United States, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labor United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reor service is lawfully claimed in any one of the claimed and conveyed out of said territory to the person claiming his or her labor or service." Mr. UPHAM sustained his amendment in substance as follows: I will, sir, refer to the proceedings of the Congress of the Confederation in 1784. On the 9th of April, 1784, Congress took into consideration the report of a committee consisting of Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Chase of Maryland, and Mr. Howell of Rhode Island, to whom was recommitted their report of a plan for a temporary government of the western territory. The plan reported contained a clause prohibiting slavery in the territory after the year 1800. | Here is the clause, and the vote upon it: "IN CONGRESS OF THE CONFEDERATION, "That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, New Hampshire. Massachusetts... Rhode Island.... Connecticut...... de la Palma without being involved in the pres- New York........ Pennsylvania..... Maryland......... North Carolina.. Mr. Speight, no. Virginia.......... Mr. Kearny, ay. [29TH CONG. "So the question was lost, and the words were stricken out." It required the vote of seven States to carry a proposition in the affirmative, so the words were stricken out. It will be perceived, sir, by looking at the vote, that seven States voted aye, but there is an asterisk put down to the State of New Jersey, and the aye of Mr. Dick, it appears, was not counted. I do not know for what reason it was rejected, but, probably, because the whole delegation from the State was not present. Only three States voted to reject the article-Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. Mr. Jefferson voted to retain it, but Mr. Hardy and Mr. Mercer voted to reject it. North Carolina was divided, and her vote was lost. So the vote stands six States for retaining the article, and three for rejecting it. I have introduced these proceedings, sir, for the purpose of showing, that immediately after the peace of 1783, the people regarded slavery as a great evil, and desired to prohibit it in all the territories belonging to the Confederation.. But to proceed: In 1787, the attention of the Congress of the Confederation was again directed to the subject of slavery in the Northwest Territory, and an ordinance for the government of the territory, prohibiting slavery, was reported by a committee, consisting of Mr. Carrington of Virginia, Mr. Dane of Massachusetts, Mr. R. H. Lee of Virginia, McKean of South Carolina, and Mr. Smith of New York. Here, sir, is the article prohibiting slavery, and the vote upon it: Mr. "IN CONGRESS OF THE CONFEDERATION. "13th July, 1787. According to order, the ordinance for the Government of the territory of the United States, north-west of the river Ohio, was read a third time, and passed, as follows: "ART. 6. There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid. "Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the resolutions of the 23d of April, 1784, relative to the subject of this ordinance, be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and declared null and void. Done, &c. "On passing the above ordinance, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. Yates: Massachusetts... Mr. Dane, ay. New York........ Mr. Smith, ay. Mr. Yates, no. New Jersey..... Mr. Scheurman, ay. Ay. Ay. Ay. Virginia.......... North Carolina.. South Carolina... Ay. Mr. Gayson, ay. Mr. R. H. Lee, ay. Ay. Mr. Carrington, ay. Mr. Blount, ay. Ay. Mr. Hawkins, ay. Mr. Kean, ay. Ay. Mr. Huger, ay. Georgia....... Mr. Pierce, ay. "So it was resolved in the affirmative." Ay. ticle. There was but one vote against it, and better, and more time had remained to us, it Sir, we are in the midst of a war, not waged at home in defence of our soil, but waged a thousand miles off, and in the heart of the teritories of another Government. Of that war no one yet sees the end, and no one counts the cost. It is not denied that this war is now prosecuted for the acquisition of territory; at least if any deny it, others admit it, and all know it to be true. Under these circumstances, and plainly seeing this purpose to exist, seven or eight of the free States, comprising some of the largest, have remonstrated against the prosecution of the war for such a purpose, in language suited to express their meaning. These remonstrances come here with the distinct and precise object of dissuading us from the further prosecution of the war for the acquisition of territory by conquest. Before territory is actually obtained, and its future character fixed, they beseech us to give up an object so full of danger. One and all, they protest against the extension of slave territory; one and all, they regard it as the solemn duty of the representatives of the free States to take security in advance that no - more slave States shall be added to the Union. They demand of us this pledge, this assurance, before the purchase money is paid or the bargain concluded. And yet, Mr. President, ingenuity has been taxed to its utmost; criticisms, both deep and shallow, and hypercriticisms quite incomprehensible, have all been resorted to, in the hope of showing that we do not understand the people; that their resolutions are not what they seem to be; that they do not require any immediate movement or present opposition; that they only look to some distant future, some emergencies yet to arise; that they only refer to a disposition in regard to territory, after it shall have been acquired and settled; and in one instance, I think it was said that it did not appear that any thing was required of us for fifty years to come. [MARCH, 1847. pose. On the other hand, the other branch of the party votes eagerly and unitedly for territory, the Wilmot proviso being rejected, because these gentlemen take it for granted, that that proviso being rejected, States formed out of Mexico will necessarily be slave States, and added to this Union as such. Mr. President, I must be indulged here in a short retrospection. In the present posture of things and of parties, we may well look back upon the past. Within a year or two after Texas had achieved its independence, there were those who already spoke of its annexation to the United States. Against that project, I felt it to be my duty to take an early and a decided course. Having occasion to address political friends in the city of New York in March, 1837, I expressed my sentiments as fully and as strongly as I could. From those opinions I have never swerved. From the first But here, sir, I cannot but pause. I am I saw nothing, and have seen nothing, but evil arrested by the occurrences of this night which, and danger to arise to the country from such I confess, fill me with alarm. They are omi- annexation. The prudence of Mr. Van Buren nous, portentous. Votes which have been just stifled the project for a time; but in the latter passed by majorities here, cannot fail to arrest part of the Administration of Mr. Tyler, it was public attention. Every patriotic American, revived. Sir, the transactions and the occurevery man who wishes to preserve the consti- rences from that time onward, till the measure tution, ought to ponder them well. I heard, was finally consummated in December, 1845, sir, the honorable member from New York, are matters of history and record. That his(Mr. Dix,) and with a great part of his remarks tory and that record can neither be falsified nor I agreed; I thought they must lead to some erased. There they stand, and must stand foruseful result. But, then, what does he come ever; and they proclaim to the whole world, to, after all? He is for acquiring territory and to all ages, that Texas was brought into under the Wilmot proviso; but, at any rate, this Union, slavery and all, only by means of he is for acquiring territory. He will not vote the aid and active co-operation of those who against all territory to form new States, though now call themselves the "Northern Demoche is willing to say they ought not to be slave racy" of the United States; in other words, States. Other gentlemen of his party, from by those who assert their own right to be rethe Northern and Eastern States, vote in the garded as nearest and dearest to the people same way and with the same view. This is among all the public men of the country. called "the policy of the Northern Democracy." Where was the honorable member from New I so denominate the party only because it so York, where were his Northern and Eastern denominates itself. A gentleman from South friends, when Texas was pressing to get into the Carolina, (Mr. BUTLER,) if I understood him Union, bringing slaves and slavery with her? rightly, said he wanted no new territory: all Where were they, I ask? Were they standing he desired was equality, and no exclusion; he up like men against slaves and slavery? Was wished the South to be saved from any thing the annexation of a new slave State an object derogatory; and yet he does not vote against which "Northern Democracy opposed, or the acquisition of territory. Nor do other Sen- from which it averted its eyes with horror? ators from Southern States. They are, there- Sir, the gentleman from New York and his fore, in general, in favor of new territory and friends were consulting and assisting, aiding new States being slave States. This is the and abetting, the whole proceeding. Some of policy of the Southern Democracy. Both par- them were voting here as eagerly as if the salties agree, therefore, to carry on the war for vation of the country depended on bringing in territory, though it be not decided now whether another slave State. Others of us from the the character of new acquired territory shall North opposed it as far as we could. We rebe that of freedom or of slavery. This point monstrated, we protested, we voted; but the they are willing to leave for future agitation "Northern Democracy " helped to out-vote us, and future controversy. Gentlemen who are to defeat us, to overwhelm us. And they acin favor of the Wilmot proviso are ready, never-complished their purpose. Nay, more. The theless, to vote for this bill; though that pro- party in the North which calls itself, by way viso be struck out. The gentleman from New of distinction and eminence, the "Liberty York is ready for that, and his Northern and Eastern friends, who sit round him here in the Senate, are as ready as he is. They all demand acquisition, and maintain the war for that pur Party," opposed, with all its force, the election of the Whig candidate in 1844, when it had the power of assisting in and securing the election of that candidate, and of preventing Mr. Polk's |