The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1820-08-16

Cony ia ffHcr from Samuel Eddy 10 Moses
Brown, &Drinen during The tate session 81
Csngress, in reply TO one from Friend Is
and nOap hubhshed al fhe request cfa friend
70 Mr.. E.--Eys Moses Brown has sta'ed
30 several, Mt he syes sahsfed aSith the
reasons in shis letter.
WAsHIseroN, April ., 1890.
*Sir--You express wish to know
the reasons which induced me to vote
as did, ON the Missouri question. 1
will, with pleasure, assign them, as tar
as can in the compass of a letter, be-
Cause you have right to know them,
and because, not like many, you. ask be-
fore you condemn. 1t may be proper,
however, first to state, that my views OF
slavery are not at all altered, either 'nor-
ally or politically considered. Neither
do | question the right of Congress to
impose conditions ON the admission OF
new States from acquired territory. hut
! considered refusal of the compro-
mise, a refusal of that which does, in
fact, restrict, not extend, slavery. 1t
was reduced to certainly, that the Scn-
ate would not agree to the admission Ut
Maine or Missouri into the Union, with
the restriction on the latter. All polite
al considerations out OF the question,
what was then the best course to be pur
sued, to effect the object OF mere abo-
hEiuu nan z II is 10 DC Tcmsnbcrrd,
that before hc compromisr, slavery was
permitted 10 all the territory ofthc VI
States wesl 81 the Mississippi 10 re-
fuse The cf)znpronaise. IharetqEs, ws&t,
tcrnlix xlavery still 10 continue 5lf d'f vais
territory. X was 10 lose all ard gain
noshing 10 accept The ccfnrromlse,
Wa to limit il to the ntw State of Mis-
souri, and the territory south If So Ia
degrees OF north latitude. The territory
therefore within which slavery is per-
mitted. is small space, compared with
the whole territory from which 1t is ex-
cluded. Add to this, the probability, as
is asserted BY those who profess to be
acquainted, that in short time, the pco-
pie of Missouri will OF their own accord,
exclude slavery from their state, the
majority in favor of it being small. You
4uay recollect that compromise was at
tempted the last session, but failed. AT
the commencement of the present, a
similar attempt was made by the mover
OF the restriction in the Missouri bill,
John w. Taylor, Esq A committee,
at his motion, was appointed, and ef
= -vl,ich ne wascslifnah. For this com.
mi,tce, l, with the restrictionists gene
rally, voted, being myself, from the be.
ginning, in favor ofa compromise, and
with which my votes do not conflict.
MIR. TAYLOR made two propositions OF
compromise to the committee, neither OF
whcA, in my Judgment. is so favorable
as that adopted by the final vote. The
first was, to con6ne slavery to the south
of the rivers Missouri and kanses. The
second, to permit the present slses in
Missouri to remain such, and their pos
,erity after them, and the nonresident
owners of land in Missouri, owning
slaves, to settle those lands with their
slaves, their descendants to remain such.
The latter proposition was made, pre-
sumo, to get rid ot the objection which
would arise from the retrospective ope-
ration of a law, prohibiting slavery in a
territory within which it was permitted
at the time Of the purchase and settle.
ment of the lands. from and under the
authority Of the United Sates.--The
latter proposition was offered to be a.
greed to by Mr. Taylor in the com.
mittee of conference, though he did.no
offer il as proposition. | mention
these facts to shew, that to he in favor Of
a compromise, is not TO be in favor OF
slavery, for no one presume will con-
v
few lines at the beginning. in relation 10 q.
r,hcr subject, are ori,ied.