WRITINGS OF SAM HOUSTON, 1850
220
It was not the North that destroyed the "Clayton compromise bill," as it is called, at the session of 1848. No, sir. It was defeated by southern gentlemen. It was never even indulged a hearing in the House of Representatives. It was laid on the table immediately on the motion of a southern gentleman; Sir, I contend that, upon the principle of self-government, California is entitled to come into this Union as a State. Nor does it operate prejudically to the South. For if you were to make her into two or more States, the indications undoubtedly are you would be only multiplying or dividing her into free States, and thus multiply and increase the preponderance against south- ern interests. Sir, if the preponderance is in favor of the North, is that a reason for disunion and resistance to the Constitution of the country. I cannot conceive that it is. If the South should succeed in such an effort would she gain anything? Would it multiply her population or give them any advantage which they do not possess as members of the Union? The evils connected with such a measure as disunion would be fraught with utter destruction not only to the South, but also to the North. We would be a distracted, a wretched people; a people without a nation, without a country. Suppose the Union divided-Mason ,and Dixon's line the boundary-what would be our condition? An American might go to France or to England, where an American enunciates his country's name with as much pride as Paul did when he ex- claimed "I am a Roman citizen." The name "American" com- mands respect. It commands honor and homage from the nations of the earth that are trodden down beneath despotic Kings. "Where are you from"? would be the question put. "I am from America," would be the answer. "America, America! Where abouts? From the North-the Northern Republic? Why, you are an Abolitionist; you are not from the land of Washington." If from the South, when asked where are you from, the answer would be "from the South-the Southern Republic"? "Why, you are a nullifier, a disunionist." In such a contingency the Amer- ican name would not command the respect that it does now. What more glorious appellation in a foreign land than "American citizen!" Why should we allow that respect to diminish? Let us preserve that sacred name. Let us preserve it, with the Consti- tution under which it stands. We of the South ask no com- pro.mise. Give us the Constitution. Tread not upon our rights by undelegated power. Though a majority should rule we are
"'
Powered by FlippingBook