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: 7 of 8
View a full description of this pamphlet.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
7
comes, he will be the imitator of that historical character to whom the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania, (Mr. MCLANAHAN,) referred-" the base Judean who, for thirty pieces of silver, threw
away a pearl richer than all his tribe."
The South acquiesced, sir, in this compromise. Texas being the next acquisition after its
adoption, it was applied to that country. Our claims to Oregon being settled, and all of that
country lying above the compromise line, the North applied the prohibition of slavery to the
whole of that country, and the South acquiesced in it. Mr. Polk placed his approval of the bill
upon that express ground. The North, after applying the compromise line to Texas, now
seeks to get rid of it by restricting the just territorial rights and limits of Texas. In this we
think we have just cause of complaint ; but the gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. CAMPBELL,) manu-
factures out of this transaction two of the main counts in his indictment against the South. That
gentleman congratulates himself upon the fact that Ohio has schoolhouses and schoolmasters at
home. From the singularly inaccurate account which he gave of that very recent and marked
event in our public history, I could not resist the conclusion that Ohio needed her schoolmasters.
That gentleman charges the annexation of Texas upon the South, and through that policy, he
says, northern labor was stricken down by the overthrow of the Tariff of 1842, by the votes of
the Senators from Texas.
Mr. CAMPBELL here stated that he said it was southern policy.
Mr. TooMas continued. Neither allegation is supported by the facts. When Mr. Tyler at-
tempted to annex Texas by treaty, it was strongly urged upon the South, on sectional grounds,
by distinguished gentlemen connected with his government. On its presentation to the Senate,
it was defeated by a large majority, embracing both northern and southern men. It was tien
taken up by the Democratic party as a party measure ; it was declared by them to be a great
American question. Mr. Van Buren was overthrown at Baltimore for opposing it; Mr. Polk
was nominated for the Presidency mainly for his support of it. Upon every Democratic flag
throughout the Republic--North, South, East, and West-were inscribed "Polk, Dallas, Texas,
and Oregon." The Democratic party triumphed; the Whig party of the South combatted it
with a fidelity equal to that of the North ; both divisions of the party were overthrown in their
respective sections, and a majority of the people at the North, as well as the South, sanctioned
the annexation of Texas. After this decisive public verdict in its favor, several Whigs from the
South voted for it; it had become a mere question of time and terms of annexation. Their con-
stituents were deeply interested in the terms. 1 then approved, and now approve, their course.
The Tariff of 1842 fell by the same means; hostility to it was inscribed upon those same ban-
ners; it became a cardinal principle of Democratic faith ; it was promulgated by the same party
convention, in which the whole North was not only represented, but in which it had an over-
whelming majority. If the act of 1846 is undermining northern industry, it is no fault of ours.
I, and every other southern Whig, except my friend from Alabama, (Mr. I1LLIAr.D,) voted
against it. I have never yet given a sectional vote in these halls. I never will. Whenever the
state of public opinion in my own section shall deter me, or the injustice of the other shall in-
capacitate me, from supporting the true interests of the whole nation, and the just demands of
every part of the Republic, I will then surrender a trust which I can no longer hold with honor.
Neither are the consequences of the act of 1846 justly chargeable to Texas. Where was the
Empire State when that battle was fought and lost? Where was New Hampshire, Maine,
Michigan, Indiana, Illinois? Yes, sir, where was Ohio? Your journals will show they were in
the ranks of those whom the gentleman now chooses to consider the enemies of northern labor.
If the overthrow of the Tariff of 1842 has paralyzed the arm of northern labor, the suicidal blow
was stricken by its own hands.
To return from this digression : Our next and last acquisition was California and New Mex-
ico. They are the fruits of successful war. We have borne our full share of its burdens-we
demand an equal participation in its benefits. The rights of the South are consecrated by the
blood of her children. The sword is the title by which the nation acquired the country. The
thought is suggestive; wise men will ponder upon it-brave men will act upon it. I foresaw
the dangers of this question ; I warned the country of these dangers. From the day that the
first gun was fired upon the Rio Grande until the act was consummated by all the Departments
of this Government, I resisted all acquisitions of territory. My honorable colleague before me
(Mr. STEPHENS) and myself, standing upon the ground taken by the republican party in 1796
against Jay's treaty, voted against appropriating the money to carry out the treaty of Gauda-
lupe Hidalgo. We had no support from the South, and but half a dozen votes from the North.
I saw no good prospect of adjusting fairly the question which the acquisition would present. I
therefore resisted a policy which threatened the ruin of the South or the subversion of the Gov-
ernment. And to-day, men of the North, these are the alternatives you present us. We
demand an equal participation in the whole country acquired, or a division of it between the
North and the South. For very obvious reasons, founded upon natural causes, we are less
solicitous about the extent of the privilege than the recognition of the principle. '1 he first
would most probably be a boon without a benefit; the last is the vital spark of our whole po-
litical system, whose extinguishment is death. The North now disavows the principle of
division. After getting more than two-thirds of Louisiana, a portion of Texas, and all of
Oregon under the Missouri compromise line of division, she now repudiates it. I am content.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This pamphlet can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Pamphlet.
Toombs, Robert Augustus, 1810-1885. 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, pamphlet, 1850; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth497885/m1/7/: accessed July 8, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Schreiner University.