e are dealing with the great principles which uphold our
Government!
It is by great principles that nations are governed and their
destinies are shaped. The world is governed by ideas and not by
material interests. These facts must be kept distinctly in view by
those who take upon themselves the business of making constitutions.
It is stated that we are called here to settle the terms upon which
certain sectional differences are to be arranged. We ought, then,
first to ascertain what is the extent--what the limit of these
differences.
In the first place, it is agreed that no constitutional rights have
yet been invaded. The occasion for fear is not what _has been_, but
what _may be_ done. I suppose we are all alike tenacious of our
rights, whether we derive them from the Constitution or from any other
source. The rights of the State are just as important to New York as
to Virginia. But it is said that appearances exist that indicate an
intention on our part to interfere with some of the institutions of
the South. We ask for the proof. None is forthcoming--nothing but the
most vague and indefinite suspicion.
We propose to give the most satisfactory and absolute guarantees on
that subject--the subject of interference with Southern
institutions--even to put those guarantees into the Constitution. But
that is not satisfactory--we are told that we cannot be trusted. I
should hope that no Northern State could ever be truthfully required
to admit that it had given cause for such an apprehension. But it is
evident that this is not the real occasion of calling us together.
What, then, is the occasion?
It is said, that certain sectional rights in the Territories must be
secured and guaranteed. In that view I desire to call the attention of
the Conference to two or three points in the plan of the proposed
security.
As I understand the scheme, it is this: It is proposed to divide our
present territory by the line of 36 deg. 30', with a view to have
emigration from the free States go north, and from the slave States go
south of that line. This is made in connection with a limitation
preventing the acquisition of future territory. Now the first thing
that impresses me is the objection to placing any such restraints upon
emigration.
Mr. CLAY:--I think the gentleman misunderstands the report. I have
seen no proposition that proposes to confine or restrain emigration.
Mr. SMITH:--I concede that there is no express prov
|