mate to his principles and sentiments. He had belonged to the whig party during all his active life, and he should be the last to leave it , because of the two great parties it was the most devoted to the cause of freedom and emancipation. Mr Cass. (resuming.) I was going to remark that, with respect to the creed of the whig party, or the orthodoxy of the senator from New York, it is a matter with which I have no concern; but with respect to progress, I have something to say. My progress is within the constitution. My age of progress is circumscribed there. If the senator from New York is going out of it, I do not believe in his progress at all. No, sir! My object is to support the constitution which, under God, is the source of our prosperity and happiness. Mr. SEWARD. (in his seat.) That is mine. . If it is, I think he has a very strange way of showing it, by pronouncing it immoral, and denying the validity of its obligations. It would last scarcely a day, if that senator, with his avowed principle of action, bad the direction of the government. I do not say that it would be dissolved immediately, but the seeds of dissolution would be sown, and would ripen into a harvest of misfortune as speedily as the rankest regetation gains maturity under a tropical sun. Some conversation and explanations here took place between Mr. Cass and Mr. Calhoun, in reference to the remarks of Mr. Calhoun in his speech, in relation to the means of saving the union; which were, the immediate settlement of the slave question, and an amendment of the constitution : also in relation to the admission of California being made a test question; which Mr. Cass understood to mean, that the admission of California would be followed by a dissolution of the union; a construction of his remarks which Mr. Calhoun disavowed. In regard to the word "now,” he did not mean that the amendment to the constitution must be made instanter, but that an indication should be given now, that such amendment would be agreed to, leaving it to be carried through the ordinary process. Mr. Cass concluded his speech the next day. He said: I was remarking yesterday, when I resigned the floor, that there were certain things we could not accomplish, and others that, with equal certainty, we might take for granted we could do. Among the latter, was the bill providing for the recapture of fugitive slaves ; and another object, which I trust will be accomplished, is the providing of a government for the new territories. I think it essential to calm this agitation, and so long as these territories are left without a government, so long will the present state of things continue, and this agitation be kept up, which is -a 80 harassing to the tranquillity, and dangerous to the peace, of the union. That a law may be passed authorizing the people of the territories to govern themselves, without any Wilmot proviso being attached to it, is my wish and my hope. Sir, we cannot stand before the country, and before the world, and object to the admission of California on the ground that has been urged. The objection is not to her boundaries, though that topic has been much debated. I myself was at first startled at the boundary claimed, stretching as it does along the coast of the Pacific one thousand miles—a much greater extent than any one state in the union ought to possess. But the country between the ocean and the sea is a narrow one, and east of the mountains is a desert, and in proportion to its extent, the quantity of arable land is small. Be the boundaries as they may, it is not probable that its population will ever be as great as that of some of the other states of this union. And if its southern boundary were to stop at the mountains, there would be left between them and the Mexican possessions a small district of country, which would have to remain for an indefinite period, perhaps forever, in a colonial condition. The senator from South Carolina, (Mr. Calhoun,) who I regret to see is not in his seat to-day, does not assume this ground as an objection to the admission of California. That objection rests upon her present position and mode of application; because she has established a government of her own without passing through a territorial process, and comes here of her own accord, and asks admission into this union. This ground of objection cannot be maintained in this age of the world, before the people of this country, and, I may add, the people of Christendom. There are two positions I have always maintained with reference to this subject--first, that congress, under the constitution, has no right to establish governments for the territories; secondly, that under no circumstances have they the right to pass any law to regulate the internal affairs of the people inhabiting them. The first may be a matter of necessity; and when the necessity exists, if a senator votes for it, he votes upon his own responsibility to his constituents. If they believe the necessity and support him, he is safe, but if not, he must fall. If I had voted under such circumstances, I must have looked to my constituents for my justification ; but under no circumstances could I have voted for any law interfering with the internal concerns of the people of a territory. No necessity requires it; there is no necessity which would justify it. Mr. Chase. Did I understand the senator as saying that, in voting for a bill to establish a government in the territories he would assume the exercise of any authority not given in the constitution ? Mr. Cass. The honorable senator will undoubtedly recollect, that in a historical document called the Nicholson letter, which subsequent circumstances have made somewhat important, I distinctly stated my views upon this subject, and those views have remained unchanged to the present hour. I maintained, that no power is given by the constitution to establish territorial governments, but that where an imperious necessity exists for such a measure, the legislator who yields to it must look to his constituents for his justification. Mr. Chase. I understood the senator to say, that there was no such authority given by the constitution ? Mr. Cass. I said, that if we do an act not authorized by the constitution, under a pressure of necessity, that act must be done upon our own responsibility; and I refer the gentleman to the authority of Mr. Madison, who justified the action of the congress of the confederation, on the subject of territories, upon this ground—and upon this alone. If the gentleman will take the trouble to look at my speech on the Wilmot proviso, he will find my views on this point distinctly laid down. What is the objection in principle to the admission of California ? Allow me to say, that great political rights and movements, in this age of the world, are not to be determined by mere abstract or speculative opinions. There is no want of heavy books in the world, which treat of political science; but you need not go to them to ascertain the rights of men-either individuals or in communities; if you do, you will lose yourself groping in a labyrinth, and where no man can follow you. If there are rights of sovereignty, there may be wrongs of sovereignty; and this truth should be held in everlasting remembrance. And this is the case with regard to California. We have rights, and we have duties; and if the former are sacred, the latter should be sacred also. One of these duties we have neglected to perform; and we are told by gentle men who have spoken here, that when a state wishes admission into the union, she should come to the door of congress and knock for admission. California has thus come, and knocked; but no door is open to her, and she is to be told, “Go back and wait till we are ready." There is but one door through which you can enter, and that door we keep shut. You must pass through a territorial government; but that government we have neglected to give you, and we are probably as far from establishing it as ever. And such is the paternal regard we manifest toward one hundred thousand American citizens, who are upholding the flag of our country on the distant shores of the Pacific. A good deal has been said about precedents : I am not going to examine either their application or authority, though it has been pretty clearly shown by others, that they fully justify this measure of admission. . About two months after the date of this speech of Gen. Cass, Mr. Calhoun, who had participated in this debate, died in the city of Washington, on the 31st of March, 1850. His death was succeeded, in 1852, by that of his two distinguished associates in that body, Mr. Clay and Mr. Webster. The former died at Washington, on the 29th of June, of that year; the latter in the following autumn, at his residence in Massachusetts. CHAPTER LXXIV. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1852.-INAUGURATION OF MR. PIERCE. The national democratic convention to nominate candidates for president and vice-president, met at Baltimore on the 1st of June, 1852. The Hon. John W. Davis, of Indiana, formerly speaker of the house of representatives, was chosen president of the convention. The two-thirds rule, which was again proposed, was opposed on the ground that it enabled a minority to force the majority into their views. It was, however, adopted. Although the convention was more pacific than that of 1848, there was quite as great a difficulty in effecting a nomination. Gen. Cass received on the first ballot, 117 votes; James Buchanan, 93; Stephen A. Douglas, 20; Wm. L. Marcy, 27. The balloting, which did not begin until the 3d day, (June 3d,) ended for that day with the 17th ballot, which stood : For Cass, 99; Buchanan, 87; Douglas, 50; Marcy, 26. The next day's balloting closed with the 33d trial, Cass having received 123 votes; Buchanan, 72; Douglas, 60; Marcy, 25. On the 5th, the Virginia delegation having retired for consultation, returned, and cast their votes for Franklin Pierce, of New Hampshire, who, on the 49th ballot, received the unanimous vote of the convention. William R. King, of Alabama, was nominated for vice-president. The whig convention, which met at the same place on the 16th of June, was also in session five days, having found it no less difficult to unite upon a candidate for president. John G. Chapman, of Maryland, was chosen president of the convention. Some delay in the proceedings of the convention was caused by a contest for seats between some of the New York delegates. Unlike the convention of 1848, a platform of principles was adopted, by a vote of 227 to 60, and before any attempt at nomination had been made. Balloting commenced the 3d day of the session, Mr. Fillmore receiv. ing 132 votes ; Gen. Scott, 131; Mr. Webster, 29. The next day began with the 7th ballot; and on the 53d, the result was, for Scott, 159; Fillmore, 112; Webster, 21; Scott having a majority. William A Graham, of North Carolina, was nominated for vice-president. The declarations of sentiment, or platforms of the two parties were less antagonistic than usual. The distinctive principles of the respective parties were less prominently set forth ; while upon certain abstract questions, and the subject of slavery, the two conventions took the sam ground. The democratic convention declared, “ That congress has no power under the constitution to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of every thing appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts of the abolitionists, or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calcolated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences; that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend of our political institutions. “ That the foregoing proposition covers, and was intended to embrace the whole subject of slavery agitation in congress; and therefore the democratic party of the union, standing on this national platform, will abide by and adhere to a faithful execution of the acts known as the compromise measures settled by the last congress—the act for reclaiming fugitives from service or labor included; which act being designed to carry out an express provision of the constitution, can not with fidelitý thereto be repealed, nor so changed as to destroy or impair its efciency. " That the democratie party will resist all attempts at renewing in congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made." The whig convention makes the following declaration : “ That the series of acts of the thirty-first congress—the act known as the fugitive slave law included—are received and acquiesced in by the whig party of the United States, as a settlement in principle and sub stance, of the dangerous and exciting question which they embrace; and |