difference. I would say further, that I would stand there, and, if you please, like him of the flaming sword; and that the first effort which proposed to extend slavery I would oppose; although I am not aware that any one desires or proposes to extend it by law of Congress. But until that was attempted, I would not invite it by officious and unnecessary opposition. I would simply stand guard on the frontier. I would not act myself nor let any one else act; I would not permit laws by Congress to extend, nor ask for laws to prohibit; but let the people of the Territory take care of it, as they are so soon to be States. I would not oppose slavery extension in advance by law, or extend it by law. Both extremes of opinion can stand by, and suffer the people of a Territory, already a State except in form, to dispose of the question, with propriety, and in peace. Therefore, instead of saying that I am opposed to the extension of slavery there, I would say I am not in favor of it. That is the doctrine of non-interference, and is and must and will be the doctrine of the National Democratic party. Congress shall not touch the question, but, it being a domestic question, the people of the Territory about to become States may and ought to dispose of it. Is not that fair and common ground? And if we have faith in the capacity of the people to govern themselves, it is ground upon which all can stand. I do not know whether my friend's resolutions take this precise position. If they embody this doctrine, I support them cheerfully. I prefer the form of expression which I have indicated, because it expresses clearly the position of non-interference. I, Sir, like you, have been laden with the honors of the Democratic party in our State. I have no right to dictate to that party, or to shape and direct its course; nor have I any such desire. I recollect too well-for my memory is acute on that point-where they found me and where they placed me. They made me by no means a king, yet they brought me literally, like the fabled peasant, from the garden; and I desire not to hold a sentiment that does not belong to that party; I would express no opinions but those it holds dear. I desire a full, free, perfect understanding with it and all its members, and to see it continue in entire harmony and concert of action with the great Democratic party of the Union. It has been said that the South has done this, and that, and the other-and that we of the North have a right to com

plain. But look back a moment to 1840-when the proud Empire State quailed under the blows of the enemy-and when the South stood united in favor of New York's candidate for the Presidency. To be sure they were borne down by the overwhelming vote of the Northern States-but did the South give way to them? Away then with this spirit of crimination and recrimination.

The Democratic party of the Union must stand or fall together. Under no mere sectional organization can it act at all, much less with success in a Presidential contest. The North is bound to be just and can afford to be generous towards the South. It should hold no language but that of kindness and generosity. Above all things should we avoid the language of irritation and reproach. How, sir, was I treated when I offered the resolution I have read to this body? The Southern slave agitators, for they were there, said it was worse than the proviso. Northern abolitionism said it extended slavery purposely everywhere throughout all our land. And like all who interfere in a family quarrel, I found myself in conflict with, and receiv ing blows from both sides. But, Sir, I have seen the necessity of standing up, and of standing straight up, leaving consequences to follow in their own good time. The Democratic party must have patience. We cannot extend our platform, if we would, to get rid of Whig or Abolition slanders, without weakening it and destroying it altogether. Though it should be made as long as Jacob's ladder, it would not be long enough to guard us against the slanders of our opponents. As for our Whig friends who go in on the weakness of the Democracy, and go out on their own, they must soon take the latter course. They will be ready to go out before we are ready to go in, if we are not careful. The true course for us is to place this question on some common ground, where we can stand firmly and unitedly. This is no time for the Democratic party to falter. Its mission is not only here, but over the entire hemisphere. The old world is reeling and tottering under the convulsions of the hour. Day after day, thrones and dynasties go by the board, under the slow but sure workings of the Democratic principle. Let us bear up this proud example of a free government, for the encouragement and imitation of mankind. Continue in the Democratic faith. Lay aside non-essentials, or, at

least, do not engage in domestic conflicts over them. I can go in everything, personally, as far as any one here. In all that looks toward human progress and rights, I acknowledge no superior. But in matters of party principles, I would go no further than I have indicated. I would greatly prefer that all would unite with me, but I would not impose my opinions on them, nor do I pretend to lay down boundaries for others on this question. I have seen, sir, some service in the Democratic ranks. I have stood by its principles, its measures, and its men, until my head, which was almost white with youth when I entered, is covered with premature frosts. I love it—its principles and its usages. I desire to see that glorious party united, strong and victorious. I believe it can and will be cre long firmly united and again proudly triumphant. I would not blindly adhere to preconceived opinions on such a subject; but, entertaining the views I do, for the reasons I have stated, I would go no further than I have indicated; but if others think differently, I cannot have the least wish to control or overrule their judgment.

SPEECH

UPON THE RESOLUTION OF MR. CLEMENS, OF ALABAMA, CALLING UPON THE PRESIDENT FOR INFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO THE APPOINTMENT OF A MILITARY GOVERNOR FOR CALIFORNIA, ETC., AND IN ANSWER TO REMARKS MADE BY MR. CLEMENS.

Delivered in the SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, January 17, 1850.

[A portion of the preliminary proceedings, sufficient to show the occasion and the grounds of debate, is given.

The resolution came up in order, and was read by the Secretary. Mr. CLEMENS. I stated the other day that I thought it probable that the information called for by this resolution would be furnished in answer to the resolution which has been adopted by the House of Representatives. If this should be the case it would be unnecessary to adopt this resolution; and I thought it better, therefore, to wait and see the answer to that inquiry.

Mr. DOUGLAS, of Illinois. I trust the resolution will be adopted. If the answer made to the House cover the entire subject, it will be a very small affair—a matter of very little difficulty-to send a copy of it to us.

Mr. SMITH, of Connecticut, moved to lay the resolution on the table, but withdrew the motion at the request of Mr. Douglas.

Mr. CLEMENS. I hope no Senator will be influenced in his action on this subject by any desire to extend courtesy to me. I ask nothing of the kind at the hands of any man. I desire them to vote according to the dictates of their own judgment, and to understand, too, what they are voting for. It has become so much the fashion here to discuss everything but the precise question before the Senate, that it has come to be regarded as the regular practice and custom, and the Senator who objects to it is considered captious and ill-natured. The question is not now whether this resolution shall be adopted, or whether I or anybody else is in favor of it, or even whether we want the information proposed to be obtained. That is not now the question. It was the question

the other day, however, and the Senator from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS] voted against it. It is his fault that the information has not been furnished to the Senate; and I must be permitted to express my surprise at the new-born zeal to obtain it which seems to animate him now. Why did he not vote for its adoption at the time he caused it to be laid on the table? Who prolonged this matter and prevented us from receiving this information before this time? It was the Senator from Illinois. He moved to lay it on the table, and his vote carried it there. I say the question is not now whether we want this information, or whether it is necessary, or will be of public utility, but whether it has not already been furnished to the House of Representatives; and if so, is it not an unnecessary requirement to call upon the Departments again to furnish it to us? That, sir, is the only question here now. I think it is very probable that the information has been already furnished, and I want the resolution passed by now for the purpose of ascertairing whether it has or not.

I move, Mr. President, that the resolution be laid on the table.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I claim the privilege of making a single remark. As an act of courtesy, will the Senator from Alabama give me the opportunity by withdrawing his motion?

Mr. CLEMENS. No, sir.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I ask the privilege, then, of the Senate, as an act of courtesy.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. There is no way of obtaining what the Senator desires, except by a vote of the Senate.

Mr. DODGE, of Iowa. I ask then, sir, a vote of the Senate.

Mr. KING, of Alabama. I hope my colleague will withdraw his motion, and allow the Senator from Illinois to proceed.

Mr. CLEMENS. Very well; at the suggestion of my colleague, I will withdraw the motion.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I will not say that I regret-though I did not expect -yes, I do regret that the honorable senator from Alabama has given the turn to this matter which he has. He has charged me with being responsible for the delay of this subject, because the other day when he was anxious to have it acted on, I moved to lay the resolution on the table, at the same time assuring him that I would move to take it up in an hour. The reason I gave was, that it had come up accidentally on a motion of mine to suspend the order of the day to get at the consideration of another subject; but I pledged myself that I would move to take it up in an hour, and would vote for it. With what fairness, then, can the honorable Senator from Alabama charge me with having postponed it to this time, and with having caused this delay? Can he with fairness charge me with having voted against this inquiry, when he heard me, and every Senator heard me, offer to vote to take it up in an hour; especially, when I went to him in fifteen minutes, and offered to