The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-06-20
TuuRspAY. JUNE 10, 1850.

The Chairman stated that Tue nrst pusiheSs IN
order was the question on the following amend
ment, presented by the gentleman from Tennes-
see, Mr. Stanton
Al the end of Mr.. Green's prOviso, insert the
following
Provided, hoEsvsr, That 1t shall be no objec-
ton TO the admission into the Union Of any State
which may hereafter be formed out Of the terri
tory lying south Of the parallel Of latitude Of $50
30', that the Constitution Of said State may au-
thorixe or establish slavery therein"
Mesrs Thompson of Mississippi, Stephens of
Georgia, McMullen of Virginia, McLane Of
MARYLAND, Bocock Festherston, and Meade OF
Virginia, Hilliard and Hubbard Of Alabama, sue
cessively renewed and withdrew the amendment,
each in five minutes speeches advocating his Pecn'
liar views on the slavery question
Mr. Marshall noticed that the discussion was
only confined to gentlemen OF the slavenoiding
States. He supposed that this was because mere
were no directors to the amendment by gentlemen
from the free States. A voice. You will see
when we come to voter He conceived 1t TO be
mproper-undignifed on the part of the South
to debate the proposition as they had been dong
for some time, while the North sat still, nerved
evidently for their work of aggression, when the
moment for voting came on.
The question on the amendment (Mr. Stanton's)
to the amendment of Mr. Green was then put by
tellers; and it was not agreed to-yeas 10, nays
The question recurring upon the amendment
of Mr.. Green
Mr. Seldom proposed to amend that by adding
a proposition affirming that, at the time of the
adoption Of the Missouri Compromise, it was in
tended and understood as partition for the fu-
ture between the slavehoding and non-slavehold
ing States Of the territory of the United States,
to the uttermost extent of its western limits, and
as such, was enacted mainly by the votes OF rep
resentatives from the non-slaveholding States.
Mr. S. being then entitled to the floor, urged
that the Missouri Compromise had been mainly
adopted by the votes of representatives from nom
slaveholding States, the South resisting it as an
infraction of her rights. --
Withdrawing the amendment
Mr.. Brown of Mississippi renewed it, and said
that he had long since determined to move moth
ing, in the hope of obtaining the rights OF his
constituents from the North. The last vote
taken had satisfied him that this determination
was correct.
Mr.. B. then went on to argue that the South
must draw the conclusion from such votes, that no
more slaveholding States are to be admitted into
the Union, il the people thereof desire slavery.
Mr.. Bissell, interrupting the gentleman from
Mississippi, remarked that he was out of the
--.n.2 49, -otA&yy, z IrT Ia5 be been
here, he would have voted for it.
Mr.. Brown, continuing, urged earnestly that it
was time for the South to arouse and resist by a
dissolution Of the Union, if nothing else would
protect her from the abolition purposes Of the
North. He was himself in favor Of this course.
Withdrawing the amendment
Mr.. Carter renewed it, and urged that the
amendment had been introduced for fsctious pur-
poses.
Mr.. Stanton of Kentucky Gnterrupting Mr.. Co.
said that he had introduced it, and denied fac
tious purpose in so doing. His course had been
dictated by disposition to show to the South the
determination of the North in its true colors.
Mr. Carter, rejoining, held that that purpose,
under the circumstances, amounted to nothing
more than disposition to clog the adoption of the
BILL which was designed to carry out the will of
the inhabitants Of California. He believed all
the remarks Of the violent character Of those Of
the gentleman from Mississippi MIR. Brown to
be but gas" They were not sustained by their
constituents in threatening the Union, the was
understood to say) If the Union could be dis
solved on any such ground, it was not worth pre-
serving.
After some remarks from Messrs Thompson of
and Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr..
Venable Of North Carolina renewed the amend
ment
The gentleman from Illinois (Mr Baker, asked
yesterday, in reply to remark of the gentleman
from Tennessee, (Mr. Stanton,) where we were
10 90. He would tell the gentleman, they would
not 90 to where he came from, Great Britain)
They would stay on their own territory. They
we're native Americans They would go to their
homes and fresides, and protect their rights even
unto death This was not a threat. 1t was no
threat to tell gentlemen what the South intend to
10. II you pf6p6ee TO take from us our territory,
will at ~ oxxr Hrrna
Mr.. Baker said that the gentleman had made q
personal alusion to him. II it was his fortune or
misfortune to have been born in another country,
and if his slightest experience had enabled him to
anything, it is that this is great coun-
try and good Union, and he did not want to
break it up if gentlemen say that they do not
threaten, he said they did. Their language meant
nothing else. Miserable personalities were I'M
worthy of the place and the occasion. He did not
esteem it disgrace to have been born in foreign
country; nor did he know that his history had
shown him to be unworthy He deemed that his
constituents have discarded the prejudices enter
tanned by the gentleman from North Carolina. IL
the gentleman thinks it so great disgrace to
have been born in foreign country, 1t was inf
nitely greater disgrace to make one portion of
the country inimical to the other. He was not
conscious that he had a foreign heart or foreign
WISH and he was sure that he had not attempted
to dissolve a people whom God had designed to
dwell together In unity. He did not regard the
threats as serious. The constituents of gentle
men are not in earnest if they are and they do
not represent the facts as they occur. The Mis-
souri, line, as adopted in 1920, did not refer to
territory not then belonging to the United States
nor to the Mexican territory, and to all other
territory acquired by our land-stealing propen-
stiles.
The amendment being withdrawn, il was re-
newed severally by Messrs. Meade of Virginia,
and Stanton Of Tennessee, each speaking FIVE
minutes
Mr.. Toombs renewed it, and argued for FIVE
minutes to show the bad faith of the North. He
desired that the gentleman from Massachusetts
[ MIR. WINTHROP should show his hand on the
Missouri Compromise question. His remarks,
however, were not sufficiently audible at the Re-
porter's desk
Withdrawing the amendment
Mr.. Duer renewed II, and was understood to
declare his willingness to admit slaveholding
States, If the inhabitants thereof desire it.
Mr.. Winthrop said that one reason why he had
not taken part in the FIVE minutes discussion was,
that he did not wish to delay this bill until the
Senate shall have acted on the Compromise meas
ure He was not disposed to contribute his
share to the delay, and did not acknowledge the
right of any member to call upon him in debate.
There was nothing in the peculiar relations exist
ing between the gentleman from Georgia Mr..
Toombs and himself, which authorized the gen.
tleman to select him out, and indulge in specula-
tions rs to his intentions and motives If the gen.
tlcman intended to insult him, by mentioning
fraud in combination with his name, the impiica-
ton recoils upon the gentleman. He had pursued
a policy clear In the sight Of God and man IL
the amendment had been precisely opposite to
what II was--shas NO objection should hereafter
be made to any State formed north of 800 3O', ex-
Guiding savcry-he should have voted against It,
He would vote against everything which goes to
humbug and embarrass the bill. He had declared
for California as a single measure, and repeated
he would vote against every amendment which
will have the effect of embarrassing It,