The Journal of Negro History, Volume 3, 1918Various
History
The Journal of Negro History, Volume 3, 1918
Various
African Americans -- Periodicals
The pro-slavery faction in the convention was determined to have
slavery somewhere and had managed to have the eastern boundary of
California so designated that it extended as far as the Rocky
Mountains. This would have resulted in rejection by Congress, or a
division of the territory into a Northern and a Southern California,
giving the pro-slavery element a new State. The unwieldy boundary,
however, was discovered in time to have it changed, but not until
after much debate, which almost wrecked the constitution. The
California representatives elected by the convention left for
Washington, where they presented to Congress the constitution and the
petition of the California settlers asking for admission as a State.
There had never been a precedent for their act. Yet the settlers in
California felt perfectly justified, since it was their only safeguard
against the pro-slavery leaders who were bringing their slaves into
the territory.
Leaders at the national capital naturally hesitated, not knowing
whether or not the admission of California under the conditions thus
obtaining would aggravate or improve the national situation.
California, however, cared little about the national situation, as is
attested by the resolutions of 1850 to the effect: "That any attempts
by congress to interfere with the institution of slavery in any of the
territories of the United States would create just grounds of alarm
in many of the States of the union; and that such interference is
unnecessary, inexpedient, and in violation of good faith; since, when
any such territory applies for admission into the union as a state,
the people thereof alone have the right, and should be left free and
unrestrained, to decide such question for themselves." Broderick moved
the insertion of the following: "That opposition to the admission of a
state into the union with a constitution prohibiting slavery, on
account of such prohibition, is a policy wholly unjustifiable and
unstatesmanlike, and in violation of that spirit of concession and
compromise by which alone the federal constitution was adopted, and by
which alone it can be perpetuated." This amendment was adopted.[31]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account