The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-18
THE UNION.

which the agitation Of this question excited without en99n
And Who 10 rsheeting gPoq a. y not strongly
with indignation upon the first da~nrgs Of an aemP
array portion Of the inhabitants OF this country against
And. aits ALL what has this question do with the pn'
cipe o. slavery oar aucesots brought ms y
Of beings country they have multiplied y
alarming exent hey are the property OF our ieow eu
zens secured 10 them by The CONSTITUTION ana as n
emancipsion What then. does policy require IN relation
them That should prevent the increase by l,npoita
rgd execution OF the seyerest penalties
This atemptingi and had the pleasure OF Young
for the late session incting the penalty OF death
any convicted OF Importing slave into me unl'ed
States What does humanity demaudi Ihat we SHOULD
confne them forever within the presents limits OF the
sayehodng States, suffer the master 20 emigaie WIN
bis slaves into western America, where from the eAei
the fertility aud productions Of county, they mus be
tendery treated, better fed and IN all respects ne
condition ameliorated.
! will now read a passage from speech OF Mr..
Holmes, OF the same Stale OF Massachusetts
But this DIVISION upon the question oil slave erfitoy)
he says Is sinauafly unfortunate 10 me ony suoes
in which the slayehons States could be made 70 unite
against Are the general Interests OF DSiawae more
united with those Of Georgia than Penn'yNan,a Are he
Kentucky Sir the hopes and prospects o. ,ne Soh and
East interviewer with the prosperity Of me SCUM ana
West; and we have armed ourselves against iel az
but Of SAFETY, PEACE. EXISTENCE, They consider
il as Fastening provoking OF insurrection and
massacre Their jealousy and their sensibty reused
and they demand what motive, what inducement you
name Il humanity desst She asks such sacrifices NJ
her altar Create eaouses, heanburnings, ana haired
cord destroy Union-and your liberties are gone
And then where will slaves find The freedom wh'ch
you have poifered them al the expense OF your own
| Honest words Truly spoken and fifty spoken True
and fit then northern man OF truth ana JUS
tce who spoke them, as some southern men OF TINS gay
shrink from speaking All honor to nm on a ina. ms
words had penetrated the northern nind and influenced
the northern feeling Not nov would brother stand
against brother, and the dread OF civil discord and a
broken Union shade the hearts OF patriots.
proceed to read passages from the speeches oil
prominent souherners to show that the question OF =
balance OF political power was an open AMI understood
issue in the Missouri controversy. especially call me
attention Of the Maryland senators the spirited ground
taken by Mr. Lloyd, of their State.
Mr.. Smith, OF South Carolina, says, IN responding 10
Mr. King
He speaks the balance power He thinks you ad
nit Missouri restriction will take the balance Of
power from the non savehoIding Stles
| And proceeded to meet the argument.
/ Mr. Loyd. Of Maryland, upon the report Of Senate's
committee joining Maine and Missouri IN one bill:
1t question Of policy and Of serious policy when
presented in th shape whether the Senate shond consent
the power of portion OF the Union by The
erection a State whilst from prejudice alone, Oh
another portion Of The Union should consider myself
taid he) wanting in my duty as representative OF that
Of the county if were thus TO consent to weaken
its power.
Mr. Macon, OF North Carolina
An why the asked) were there given IN the same bill
Their population kaown ba their representation
made equal in order to keep up the proportion which
The National Convention had given to the two SECTIONS Of
the Union
Mr. Pnckney, of South Carolina:
i have endeavored show how much more the eastern
wesern-how uie right the former have TO complain, and
how unreasonable il is that while 10 continue The balance
sion 10 Maine to make up for Missouri they
scionaby require to have bot and thus add iourto ht
against the property OF the southern and west
EN- States
MIR. Nc Lane, OF Delaware;
IL has been avowed by gentlemen this floor, from
shall divide the saveholdng from the non saveholdns
States
references have made the debates OF the period y
which the Missouri controversy ragged. But ! have
thong 1t important TO establish the fact beyond dispute
tina. The North engaged IN this struggle with view tc
maintain her relative political power in the Union and tc
prevent the ascendency OF the slavehodng States in til,
Senate.
How was the controversy arranged 1t was upon the
principle of preserving The equilibrium of the po
ions Maine and Missouri admitted smu aneously
States, balancing each other in the Senate; and line
was established which took away from the sayeholdne
interest enough OF territory 10 the North IRON
apprehension OF being overcome by the political weigh
OF the slave States.
But has been alleged that the Missouri Compromis,
confined TO the territory then owned by the United
States agree that upon the statuebook the provision
for the exclusion OF slavery north oil 30 deg 80 wac
confined TO the Louisiana purchase II would scarce
have been seemly polite have provided for app
cation OF the law TO lands beyond our ur sdicton. Blu
will show that in truth and fact the adjustment
contemplated and intended at tie time TO extend
PACIFIC OCEAN, according the extension OF our terri
tories westward might require, and that it under
stood by northern and southern men The Compromise
made Congress, and II ~ to the declarations OF the
actors the arrangement that must look for the
OF interpreting their intentions and understanding.
J The whole Pacific country known to be vacant
and by reference 10 the papers of the day, will be
found thai the value OF California was during the very
Congress which agreed to this Compromise, the subject
of letter which southern senator caused TO be pub.
shed IN this city Our people and statesmen even
then looking to the spread OF the republic westward TO
the Pacific ocean.
4 The first suggestion which can find OF adjustment,
upon the basis OF division line made by Mr.. HaT-
din, OF kentucky, IN speech which he delivered IN
the House OF Representatives The 4th OF February
1870 and which may be found reported IN The National
nellgenceT OF March Q, 1920. IL may be that upon
further research he may prove TO have been the frs
10 suggest il but that would be mmaierial crcum
stanee-ior his statement Of the plan OF compromise
whether originating with him not will show concu-
svely how II intended and understood at the time
He says
II strikes me, Mr. Chairman, that this be
tied with great facility feaoh party be dspo ed. and
neither give up any pon in this controversy Can Il not
be done by permitting Missouri 20 into The Union with
boundary OF the proposed State OF Missouri
THK PAcrfc North OF The line prohibit slavery, and
SoUu r,
And now will refer to the speech OF member from
northern State in proof Of the same fact Mr.. Ste
phens, oil Connecticut, in speech IN opposition 10 the
Compromise line, delivered on goth April 1890 nearly
three months after Mr.. Hardn's speech and only foo
days before the Of The tico houses ia The
promise, says:
i The south line OF Pennsylvania State ard the Ohio
ers now form the boundary ns between toe Two parties