Page:The American Cyclopædia (1879) Volume III.djvu/598

 592 CALHOUN territory. He supported these resolutions, not only in the senate, but in a speech delivered shortly after the adjournment, March 9, 1847, at a meeting of the citizens of Charleston. He maintained in these speeches that the slave- holding states were the conservative balance of the Union, and that it was essential to their own safety and that of the Union that they should continue to have at least an equality in the senate, aa equality to be maintained at all hazards. He stated in his speech on offering these resolutions that, though he had always considered the Missouri compromise line a great error, surrendering as it did for temporary pur- poses the constitutional rights of the South, yet for the sake of peace he would be willing to acquiesce in the extension of that line to the Pacific. In the course of the following sum- mer he wrote the letter in which he developed his policy of "forcing the issue with the North." In this point of view he would regret any compromise or adjustment of the proviso, or even its rejection, without a settlement at the same time of the entire question. He com- plained in this letter of the recent repeal by Pennsylvania of her law allowing travellers and transient visitors in that state to retain their slaves for a limited term, and of similar repeals in other states. He insisted that the toleration at the North of societies, presses, and lectures which called in question the right of slaveholders to their slaves, and whose ob- ject was the overthrow of the institution, could not be acquiesced in without the certain de- struction of the relation of master and slave and the ruin of the South. To the question, what remedy there was short of a dissolution of the Union, he replied: " Only one retalia- tion." The violation of the constitution on the part of the North must he met by refusing to fulfil stipulations in their favor, of which the most efficient was the cutting off of their ships and commerce from entering into southern ports. But, to make this measure effectual, all the southern seaboard and gulf states must join in it, for which purpose a convention of the southern states was indispensable. At the ensuing session of congress, the city of Mexico being then in the possession of Gen. Scott, Calhoun submitted (January, 1848) a resolution that to conquer Mexico and to hold it as a province, or to incorporate it with the Union, would be a departure from the settled policy of the government, in conflict with its charac- ter and genius, and subversive in the end of our free and popular institutions. News hav- ing soon arrived that a treaty was signed, he warmly opposed the ten-million bill and all other measures looking to a continuation 'of hostilities. He opposed a bill, introduced on the recommendation of the president, to occu- py _ Yucatan, both for the protection of the white population, who, in danger of extermina- tion by the Indians, had sent to ask assistance, and in order to prevent that country from be- coming the colony of some European power. In this speech ho explained the origin and objects of the so-called Monroe doctrine, which was assumed by tlio advocates of the bill as the settled policy of the country. That he denied. Mr. Monroe's declarations were made for a temporary purpose, and had never been acted upon. He saw no advantage to be expected from Yucatan at all commensurate with the cost of its acquisition and the burden of its defence. As to the question of protecting the white race there against the Indians, it was not clear that the war in Yucatan was a war of races, or that the whites were blameless in the matter. Moreover, there was a tendency in all the Spanish American republics to a conflict of the same kind between the whites and the Indians. " Are we to declare now by our acts that in all these wars we are to interpose, by force of arms if need be, and thereby become involved in the fate of all these countries? Ought we to set such a precedent ? No. The first duty of every nation is to itself, and such is the case preeminently with the United States. They owe a high duty to themselves to preserve a line of policy which will secure their liberty. The success of their great po- litical system will be of infinitely more ser- vice to mankiiid than the ascendancy of the white race in the southern portions of this continent, however important that may be." In his speech (June 27, 1848) on the bill to organize the Oregon territory, he warmly opposed the extension to that territory of the anti-slavery provision of the ordinance of 1787. He not only denied any power in congress to exclude slavery from the territories, but in still stronger terms any power to do it on the part of the inhabitants or legislatures of the territories. He started in this speech the suggestion that the constitution of the United States, extending into the territories acquired from Mexico, operated to repeal the Mexican laws abolishing slavery. In a second speech he insisted that if the South wished to save the Union, or save herself, she must arouse to instant action, such as would evince her fixed determination to hold no connection with any party in the North not prepared to enforce the guarantees of the constitution in favor of the South. In the election struggle between Gen. Taylor and Mr. Cass, Calhoun does not appear to have taken much interest. At the short session following the election of Taylor he was very busy in efforts to form a union of the slaveholding states, irrespective of all preexisting party differences, to resist the progress of abolition. For that purpose a series of meetings was held, at which none but slaveholding members were present, and attended at times by 70 or 80 members, a part of whom were, however, not favorable to the object of the meeting. At the first meeting a committee of 15, one from each state, was appointed to report resolutions. This commit- tee appointed a sub-committee of five, at the head of which was Mr. Calhoun. He drafted