The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-03-02

sell their souls to Satan for othce-who would sell
their Saviour for hall the price Judas received He con-
tnues
% But now sir when tho work is accomplished. and lis
good effects visible everywhere, bow TO their superior
wisdom and ask only the humble privilege of assisting to
maintain IT,"
II is, indeed an "humble privilege" In my estima-
on, rather than make the speech which proclaims il,
The senator from Alabama had better, like Crnmer,
have put his hand INTO the flames and have II burnt TO
ashes.
He formally denounced the admission OF California as
unconstitutional In this speech he now athrms that II
was constitutional, | will read what he says:
The senator from South Carolina Mr. RnErTl says
the admission Of California unconstitutional because
me constitution provides only for the admission of States
II had not heard this same argument advanced at home
nounce il pure The constitution provides only
for the admission ola State. True but is the of adj
ago, You, sir were sitting in convention in the then Ter
rtory OF alabama framing constitution upon which you
you were committing the folly OF asking that which Con
gres had no right @ grant suppose some wseacre had
tnton provided only for the admission of Satshat Ala
into the Unionwha would have been your opinion moi
merely OF his constitutional learning but OF his
mission you have held in this body Has it ever
occurred to you that yon here unconsutionay and
that in the very act Of taking seat violated the in
sunment you were sworn to support There but three
eases believe IN our history in which States have been
Al the rest came in as Territories and il the position of
the senator from South Carolina be the early fathers
ing of the fundamental law they established Bnt while
right come in because she State he yet con
tends. with that remarkable consistency which character
ICES many OF the opponents of the Compromise that Mis-
souri, did have right Now sir the only difference be-
the w0 sa that had regular
We're both Territories nevertheless and neither could
become anything else without the Congress- The
people Of both adopted constitution and sent i here for
approval When approved, they both became States but
not until them
stituionally admitted, because, he argues she was
admitted precisely like other States They Terri
torres, as she was and the act of admission made her
State. All the other States, Alabama included, were
Territories when they were admitted so California
being Territory when she was admitted, was admitted
as constitutionally as they admitted There is the
argument have in my hand the act of Congress ad-
uniting Alabama Stale into the Union The truth is
MT IRE hand you know il ysry wsno Terri
In every instance the pursued has been this
Congress passes an act authorizing the people in the Ter
rory 10 adopt constitution and form State The peo
PIE gel together, make government adopt constitu
ton, put the machinery OF their State government into
operation, and apply here for admission State They
are Sates and they come in States Under the clause
OF the constitution authorizing Congress to admit
States into the Union their territorial garb thrown
away and they come here robed in all the dignity OF free
and independent soveleigniies Alabama the senator's
own State, was admitted in that way. The act of
Congress passed for the admission of Alabama begins
thus:
That the inhabitants of the Territory Of Alabama be-
and they hereby, authorized form for themselves
CONSERVATION ana state government and to assume such
name as they deem proper and that the said Territory
when formed into State, shall be admued the Union
whatsoever"
They agreed TO form themselves into free and indie
pendent State, and they did So II with Missouri
Here is what the people of tina, State did:
We, the people Mis- souri, inhaBng the limits here
naer designated by our representatives in convention
embed at St Louis the twelfth day of june 1920, do
mutually agree to form and establish free and ndepend
republic, by the OF the of Missouri
The government thereof do odan and establish this cons
tuition"
Missouri was a State, Alabama was a State, and all
the other States that have arisen from Territories
full sovereignties when they TO be admitted into
the Union. How was it with Missouri Missouri
adopted constitution in 1920 She was not admitted
think until 1922 Where she, then before she was
admitted into the Unioni She had all her offices in
full operaionher executive, her legislative and her
judicial departments of her government organized And
was she not State' Could she not have remained
State Was not Alabama free and independent State,
as her constitution arms, when she applied for admis
sion II must have been she could not have been
admitted hesitate not 10 say that if she had not been
State II would have been gross violation OF the
stution TO have admitted her into the Union You, Mr.
President, never supposed when you here to rep
resent her as State, that she was Territory. No,
SIR The senator from Alabama does not know the birth
OF his State.
How could the admission of senators here make
State Unless the people had previously organized the
STATE no act oil Congress admitting them as States could
make them such.
think then, the argument OF the senator in favor Of
the consttuonaty OF the admission OF California is not
of great potency Il is based upon a denial that the
people OF bis own State the authors OF their
rights and liberty. They owe their existence, not 10
such parenage for his State, if he peases He must
be hard driven for argument TO sustain his po
stlon. Alter affirming that the admission OF California
was unconstitutional he resorts 10 these expedenls 10
prove the contrary, and TO nullify his previous
guments.
As said, he now supports the whole Compromise.
so saunch Is his adherence that he he woud
not repeal the law by which the slave trade prohibited
~ ms District under the penalty OF emancipation. But
Inc dangerous feature in this bill-a that the South
cared TO oppose-was the usurpaon the part OF Con-
gess OF the power 10 emancpate the slaves in this Dis
tfict That what objected TO in that act Yet the
senator says he would not vote repeal this act He is
willing TO let the legislation by which slaves
cpaied IN this District remain TO be applied future by
lhe same course oil reasoning, TO the States He is
iainly enamored OF the Compromise.
He becomes too, an apoogst for the manner in which
and comely and honeyed words in which he apologies
Tor the execution of The act He says:
THAT been occasionally evaded la other places is
true and that in instances " has been resisted by
violence do deny But that have been expected
So and always will DO so, of all laws In county like
OUTS NO man ever believed when this law was passed
i9 would be executed in every Instance No man
ueeved so OF any law framed by the wisdom OF man IL is
cIsht mat this law has been executed faithfully
et avs Occasional failures by means warrant any
III asserting thatit is in effect dead letter. There Is
nov hW upon our statute books which sometimes
eVsueo. there u not year in which criminals do
e penalties prescribed by the law against murder
nat - no reason for the repeal OF the law II is better
e ne ol the clizen should be imperiecy protected
Jaw does not secure the certain every fugitive
docs MS much as human law can do and can con.
sttue In but one way the conduct Of that sout man who
oeslres 10 continue agitation about IT,"