~-'..<i.i~i -.---------------------------------·JI
396
WRITINGS OF SAM: HOUSTON, 1853
Jackson laid down the principle, that the General Government had power to make a work of this kind, where it was necessary to carry out the provisions of the Constitution, and where it was of a national, and not of a local character. That doctrine was recognized by Mr. Monroe, upon the occasion of the correction of his former impressions; and Mr. Monroe, during his admin- istration, acted upon that. principle. Now, if gentlemen can find in the Maysville veto message anything but the most conclusive approval of this bill, I must acknowledge that I am stultified. To my mind, it appears to be in strict conformity with the doctrine there announced by Gen. Jackson. Is this a local road? Is it confined in its operation to a State? Is it not national, and for public and general use? Is it not forming a connection between California and the Atlantic, important to the general well-being of this Union; and without some connection can those parts exist as one and the same country? They are now detached from each other, and the object of this bill is to bring those sections of the Union together. Sir, I was sorry to hear the Senatcir from Michigan [Mr. Cass] say that California could not be-detached by any convulsion which might arise in the event of a war. That was his idea; that no inconvenience could arise from that source; that Cali- fornia could not be disturbed or invaded or injured, or her comme1:ce destroyed, if we had no intermediate connection with her by land. The idea was, that she could not be blockaded by a portion of the English, or any other foreign navy, sufficient to destroy her commerce, and starve out her people If it could be done, would they not make peace the best way they could '! . . . Let me say to the honorable gentleman that necessity, growing out of starvation, has a most potent influence, and that very few human sympathies or feelings can withstand its invasive force; so that I do not care whether or not he relies on the ,loyalty of the people of California. I grant he has a right to rely on their loyalty, and they deserve the countenance and the support of the Federal Government the more on that account. But I do insist that when gentlemen in this body, in relation to a point of doctrine, political or constitutional, differ, they have a right to do so. Their regard for their former consistency of character, if they have it, and their accountability to their constituents, are sufficient responsibilities and sufficient rods to hold over them, without rebukes in this Chamber, and I shall have none of them. When I take a retrospection of thirty years, and challenge a
I
•
I
I I . !
, , I , ' I : ! I
i .
i
• : J I I
, I
Powered by FlippingBook