Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-06-06

statesmen destructive OF the interests or honor
of the saveholding States
Again; III September, 1850, Congress passed
an act Zone of the compromises of lS50,) propo-
sing TO the State OF Texas the establishing Of her
northern and western boundaries the relinquish-
ment by Texas of all territory claimed by her
exterior 10 said boundaries, aud Of all her claim
upon the United States; and To establish Terri
toral Government for New Mexico. In the fifth
clause Of the irst section of said act is the follow
ing prooiso, introduced on motion of MIR. MASON, a
Senator from Virginia:
+" Propided, That nothing herein contained shall
be construed TO impair or quality anything contained
in the third article OF tho second section Of the joint
resolution for annexing Texas TO the United States
approved March l. 1916. either as regards tho mum
ber of States that may hereafter be formed out Of the
State OF Texas, or otherwise"
The word "orHERwIsE" in this promise, was
then and is now understood to have reference TO
the establishment of domestic Slavery in Texas,
and the latitude which to control its locality.
Thus we find, as late ms 1850, that the Missouri
Compromise, which had been extended through
Texas, was again in effect recognised by Congress
as part Of he legislation Of 1850. If 50, how
| could the legislation of 1850 have rendered the
Missouri Compromise "inoperatiye and void 2"
| have felt myself justified in thus reviewing
the action of the National Legislature, up to
lS48l50, in reference TO this subject, from which
it will appear that il was always regarded by the
people of the South as iavorite proposition, in
relation to the origin and practical operations of
which no complaint whatever had been heard.
| must, in this connection introduce one or two
witnesses, who have heretofore been regarded by
the people of the South entitled to credit.
One of them, Mr. Polk, now no more, main
tanned high character for veracity, and was a
favorite with his party in Tennessee up to the
period Of his death. In ls4s, President Polk
communicated to Congress his reasons for approx
ing The bill establishing Territorial Government
for Oregon, with n restriction prohibiting Sla-
very--which restriction was similar in effect to
the "Wilmot Provso." Among other reasons
for approving the bill, Mr. Polk assigns the fol-
| lowing:
I'm December, 1872 application made to
Congress by tho people of Missouri Territory for
admission into the Union az State. Tho discussion
upon tho subject in Congress involved the question
| of Slavery, and was prosecuted with such violence
rs to produce exctoments alarming to overy patriot
| in the Union. But the good genius OF Cancellation,
which presided at tho birth of our institutions final
| ly prevailed, and the Missouri Compromise
adopted.
"rhe Missouri question had excited intense agita
ton OF the public mind and threatened to divide the
country into geographical parties alternating the feel
ings of attachment which each portion of Union
should bear to every other. The compromise alayed
the excitement, tranquillized the popular mind, and
restored confidence and fraternaI feelings. It's
thors were hailed as public bcnefact0rs.
"Ought we now to disturb tho Missouri and Texas
Compromises Ought we, at this late day, in at
tempting to annul what has been long established,
and acquesced in, to excite sectional divisions and
eaouses to ALLEVIATE the people OF different portions
of the Union from each other, and TO endanger tho
| existence Of the Union itself"
| see now in his seat one of my colleagues,
| mir. GEORGE w JONES, who was member of
| this House at the time this message was submit
| ted to Congress lie voted for the bill organizing
| Territorial Government for Oregon lie heard
| that message of Mr.. Polk, and approved it. |
know how he answered these grave questions at
the time they were propounded and would to-
day repeat TO him the questions propounded by
Mr. Polk: sought are 10 disturb The Missouri
| and Terds Compromises? Ought we at this late
| day in attempting to annul what has been so
long established and acquiesced in to excite
SECTIONAL DIVISIONS, TO ALLEVIATE the people of diff
| lerent portions of the Union from each other and
TO ENDANGKR THE EXISTENCE or THE UNION IT.
sELF2p These were grave questions at the time
and the country responded with a united voice:
MOI | ask, what is there in the condition of the
| public mind at this time, which renders these
questions less momentous than in 1882 IL has
been less than four years since passed through
an intense excitement growing out of the nstitu-
ton OF Slavery. The bitterness OF that excite
mcnt is yet felt by many, and the wounds which
were then inflicted have not all been healed, and
L tntnk lHc COnulllOu VI tue COuulT1 Is not now
better suited TO this hazardous experiment than
in lS4s when none were found so bold as to
attempt it,
In this connection may be submitted the test-
mony of the Senator from Illinois Mr.. DoUGLAs.
His competency witness all admit, and his
credibiiity his friends ought not 10 question. lie
is the champion of this proposition of repeal, and
urges il with all all the energy of desperation
On the Odd of October lSI9 he made a speech
| - 4. N. IL ~
Missouri Compromise rs follows:
"Thc Missouri Compromise had then been In prac.
tcal operation for about quarter Of century, and
had received the sanction and appreciation Of men OF
all parties in every section Of tho Union. IL had al
iayed all sectional ealouses and irrtatons growing
Of this vexed question: aud harmonized and tran
quilted the whole country IL had given TO HENRY
CLAY, as lis prominent champion the proud soubri-
quet OF the Greaf Pacfoafor and by that title and
for that service bis political friends had repeatedly
appealed 10 the people to rally under his standard
a Presidential candidate. the man who had exhib-
tied the patriotism and tho power TO suppress an
unholy and reasonable agitation, and preserve tho
Union. lie was not aware that any man or any
party from any section Of the Union, had ever urged
A. objection to Mr.. CLAY, that he was the great
| champion Of the Missouri Compromise. On the con.
trary, the effort made by tho opponents Of Mr..
CLAY 10 prove that he not entitled 10 the cxclu
sive merit Of that great patriotic measure and that
the honor was equally duo TO others well MS him,
for securing its adoption II had its origin In tho
hearts Of all patriotic men who desired 10 preserve
and perpetuate the blessings Of our glorious Union
nm origin akin 10 that Of the Constitution ofthe United
States conceived in the spirit Of frstcrns aztec
ion, and calculated Ga forever the only dan
ger which seemed 10 threaten, Mt some distant day
to the social bond Of union All the evidences
Of public opinion at that day seemed to indicate that
this Compromise had become canonizod in the hearts
| Of the American people, a sacred thing, which no
ruthless hand would be reckless enough to dis.
turb."
Mr.. Chairman, IL is worthy Of observation, that
each sectional agitation of the Slavery question
has grown, directly or indirectly, out of the ac-
QUESTION OF foreign territory The great Missouri
controversy was the unexpected result of that
wise policy Of Mr.. jefferson, which secured to this
Government the Territory Of Louisiana The
peaceful annexation OF Texas, in ls45, was not
accomplished, without some show Of opposition
from the public sentiment Of the North, the traces