Speech of Mr. R. Toombs, of Georgia, in the House of representatives, February 27, 1850, in committee of the whole on the state of the Union, on the President's message communicating the constitution of California Page: 1 of 8

                                
T/
SPEECH
OF
MR. R. TOOMBS, OF GEORGIA,
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FEBRUARY 27, 1850, IN COMMITTEE OF
THE WHOLE ON THE STATE OF THE UNION, ON THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE
COMMUNICATING THE CONSTITUTION OF CALIFORNIA.
Mr. TOOMBS said-
Mr. CHAIRMAN: There is a general discontent among the people of fifteen States of the Union
against this Government. Popular discontents are rarely ill-founded. It is almost impossible
in a free, popular government, for any considerable portion of the people to become alienated
from the government of their own free choice without a substantial reason. I propose, as a
Representative of a portion of the people who participate largely in this discontent, to inquire
into its cause, and if it be well-founded, to ask you to remove it. It is based upon a well-
founded apprehension of a fixed purpose on the part of the non-slaveholding States of the Union
to destroy their political rights; to put their institutions under the ban of the empire, by ex-
luding them from an equal participation in the common benefits of the Republic, and thereby
to bring the powers of their own Government in direct hostility to fifteen hundred millions of
their property. This brief statement suggests the propriety of the investigation upon which I
now propose to enter : What is the true relation of this Government to property in slaves ?
We are now, sir, in a transition state ; heretofore the distribution of political power, under our
system, has made sectional aggression impossible. I think it would have been wise to have
secured permanency to such distribution by the fundamental law. It was not done.
The course of events, the increase of population in the northern portion of the Republic, and
-he addition of new States, are about to give, if they have not already given, the non-slavehold-
ing States a majority in both branches of Congress, and they have a large and increasing major-
ity of the population of the Union. These causes have brought us to the point where we are
to test the sufficiency of written constitutions to protect the rights of a minority against a
majority of the people. Upon the determination of this question will depend, and ought to.
depend, the permanency of the Government. The union of these States had its birth in the
weakness of its separate members: without that single controlling element, its early history
amply demonstrates that its creation, in its present form, would have been an impossibility. It
contained uncongenial elements, and perhaps discordant interests. It left local, yet great and
important interests, of what was even then seen would be numerically the weaker section of the
confederacy, without any security against the stronger, except from parchment guarantees.
Our fathers did not imitate the wisdom of the great Grecian ambassador, who declared, when
entering into a treaty with the adversaries of his country : I will accept no other security but
this-that you shall not have the power to injure my country, if you wish to do it. Our security,
under the Constitution, is based solely upon good faith. There is nothing in its structure
which makes aggression permanently impossible. It requires neither skill, nor genius, nor
courage, to perpetrate it ; it requires only bad faith. I have studied the histories of nations and
the characteristics of mankind to but little purpose, if that quality shall be found wanting in the
future administration of our affairs. Our present Constitution was not baptized in the blood of
the revolution.
The old confederation, which was found strong enough, under a sense of common danger, to
carry us triumphantly through the war of the revolution, upon the return of peace, was sup-
posed to be insufficient for the wants of the country. Delegates met in convention at Phila-
delphia to amend it ; the present Constitution was the result of their labors. The journals and
debates of that convention attest the fact, that the delegates from the slaveholding States saw
the danger of submitting their rights to property in slaves to the hostile legislation of the pro-
posed new government. They then foresaw that they would be in a minority ; a strong hostil-
GIDEON & Co., Printers.