STATE DOCUMENTS

ON

FEDERAL RELATIONS:

THE STATES AND THE UNITED STATES.

NUMBER VI.

123. Massachusetts Against the Mexican War and

Slavery.

April 26, 1847.

Resolutions condemning the policy of the administration in the war with Mexico were passed in the sessions of 1846-47 by Vermont, Rhode Island, Maryland and Massachusetts. The latter is given below as typical. A few of the northern legislatures favored the war, although opposing the extension of slavery, as appears in the resolves of New York and Michigan of Feb., 1847. Some of the Southern States defended the administration against these attacks, notably three series of resolutions of Alabama of the sessions of 1847-48, and the elaborate resolves of Mississippi of March 4, 1848.

References: 29 Cong., 2 sess., Senate Doc., II, No. 97; III, Nos. 122, 207; House Exec. Doc., IV, Nos. 81, 85; 30 Cong., I sess., Senate Misc., No. 85; Acts of Vt., Oct. sess., 1846, 48, 49; Acts of Mich., 1847, 193–195; Laws of New York, 1847, 377; Laws of Alabama, 1847-48, 447, 448, 456, 457; Laws of Miss., 1848, 524, 525; Niles, LXXI, 371; Von Holst, III, 239-255, 335

338.

Resolved, That the present war with Mexico had its primary

241]

I

89545

origin in the unconstitutional annexation to the United States of the foreign State of Texas; that it was unconstitutionally commenced by the order of the President, to General Taylor, to take military possession of territory in dispute between the United States and Mexico, and in the occupation of Mexico; and that it is now waged by a powerful nation against a weak neighbor-unnecessarily and without just cause, at immense cost of treasure and life, for the dismemberment of Mexico, and for the conquest of a portion of her territory, from which slavery has already been excluded, with the triple object of extending slavery, of strengthening the slave power, and of obtaining the control of the Free States, under the Constitution of the United States.

Resolved, That such a war of conquest, so hateful in its objects, so wanton, unjust and unconstitutional in its origin and character, must be regarded as a war against freedom, against humanity, against justice, against the Union, against the Constitution, and against the free states; and that a regard for the true interests and highest honor of the country, not less than the impulses of Christian duty, should arouse all good citizens to join in efforts to arrest this war, and in every just way to aid the country to retire from the position of aggression which it now occupies toward a weak, distracted neighbor, and sister republic.

Resolved, That our attention is directed anew to the “ wrong and enormity" of slavery, and to the tyranny and usurpation of the "slave power," as displayed in the history of our country, particularly in the annexation of Texas, and the present war with Mexico; and that we are impressed with the unalterable conviction, that a regard for the fair fame of our country, for the principles of morals, and for that righteousness which exalteth a nation, sanctions and requires all constitutional efforts for the destruction of the unjust influence of the slave power, and for the abolition of slavery within the limits of the United States.

| Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1846-48, 541, 542.]

243]

PENNSYLVANIA FAVORS THE WILMOT PROVISO

3

The Wilmot Proviso and Slavery in the Territories.

1846-1850.

The efforts to secure the adoption by Congress of the Wilmot Proviso in August, 1846, and in February, 1847, and the later contest to obtain the recognition of a similar principle in the organization of the government in the newly acquired territory, were instrumental in calling out resolutions during the period 1846-1850, from the legislatures of nearly all the States. During the year 1847 all of the New England and Middle States, together with Ohio and Michigan passed resolutions favoring the Wilmot Proviso, while prior to the ratification of the treaty with Mexico, March 16, 1848, the legislatures of Virginia, Missouri, Alabama and Texas had vigorously opposed it.

An even larger number of resolutions were prompted by the discussion relative to the organization of the territories during the years 1848-1850. The following States passed resolves; those in opposition to slavery extension were: 1848, New Hamp., Vt., New York, Ohio (2), Wis.; 1849, New Hamp., Vt. (2), Mass., R. I., Conn., New York, Ill., Mich., Wis.; 1850, Mass., R. I. (2), Conn., New York, New Jersey, Ind., Mich. (3), Wis. Those in favor of the extension were: 1848, So. Carolina; 1849, Va., No. Carolina, So. Carolina, Florida, Missouri; 1850, Md., Va., Ga., Miss. (2), Texas. Typical resolutions from both sections follow.

References: For the texts of the resolutions see Session Laws of the several States, also the following congressional documents: 29 Cong., 2 sess., Senate Doc., Nos. 122, 149, 153, 207, 219; House Exec. Doc., Nos. 73, 89, 101; 30 Cong., I sess., Senate Misc., Nos. 15, 17; House Misc., Nos. 2, 19, 27, 84, 85, 91, 96; 30 Cong., 2 sess., Senate Misc., Nos. 38, 41, 48, 51, 61, 62; House Misc., Nos. 6, 9, 10, 12, 34, 42, 56, 58, 62; 31 Cong., I sess., Senate Misc., Nos. 24, 52, 108, 121; House Misc., Nos. 3, 4, 5, 10, 22, 25. General references: Channing and Hart, Guide, & 196; Von Holst, III, 284-327; Wilson, II, chs. ii, iii; Greeley, I, 187–198; Greeley, Slavery Extension, 44-52; Lalor, III, 1114–1117; Burgess, 334-359; Rhodes, I, 89-98; Schouler, IV, 543; V, 66-70, 95-99, 115-120; W. H. Smith, I, ch. iv; Thorpe, U. S. II, 418-425; Curtis, II, 257-259; Benton, II, 694-700; Niles, LXXIII, 44.

124. Pennsylvania Favors the Wilmot Proviso. January 22, 1847.

The following resolves are typical of the early resolutions adopted by the Northern States, referred to above. Some of these, as those of Ohio, Feb. 8, 1847, also included the exclusion of slavery from the Territory of Oregon. (Local Laws of Ohio, 1846–47, 214.)

Whereas, The existing war with Mexico may result in the acquisition of new territory to the Union;

And whereas, Measures are now pending in Congress, having in view the appropriation of money and the conferring authority upon the treaty making power to this end; therefore,

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, That our Senators and our Representatives in Congress be requested to vote against any measure whatever, by which territory will accrue to the Union, unless, as a part of the fundamental law upon which any contract or treaty for this purpose is based, slavery or involuntary servitude, except for crime, shall be forever prohibited.

[Resolutions of transmission.]

[Laws of Pennsylvania, 1847, 489, 490.]

125. Virginia Against the Wilmot Proviso.

March 8, 1847.

After the adoption of the Wilmot Proviso the second time by the House of Representatives, Feb. 15, 1847, Calhoun, on Feb. 19, in connection with a speech in the Senate in which he denounced the Proviso and called upon the South to repudiate compromise and stand upon their rights, presented a set of resolutions containing the new doctrine that Congress can impose no restrictions on slavery in the Territories.' (Works, IV, 339–349; Niles, LXXI, 407, 408. See also his speech and proceedings at Charleston, March 9, 1847. Works, IV, 394, 395; Niles, LXXII, 39, 40, 73-75; and his letter to a member of the Alabama Legislature, Benton, II, 698-700.) These led to an acrimonious debate between Benton and Calhoun. (Benton, II, 696–698; Calhoun, Works, IV, 362–382; Niles, LXXII, 223, 225.) Calhoun's resolutions were not pressed to a vote, but the principles underlying them were generally adopted in the South and found expression in the resolutions of several of the Southern Legislatures. (Ante, p. 243.) The first of these, the Virginia resolutions, were adopted unanimously, March 8, 1847, and contained in the second resolve the assertion of this doctrine in very nearly the language of Calhoun's second resolution. These typical resolutions, known as the "Platform of the South," are given below. The Virginia Legislature re-enacted these

1 The resolutions of Georgia of Dec. 22, 1835, had maintained the legality of slavery in all the Territories, but this view was not urged until Calhoun presented his resolutions. Acts of Georgia, 1835, 29.