The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1854-02-15
NUMBER %.

divine Worship, these abolition coniederates
were assembled in secret conciave, plotting by
what means they should deceive the people of
the u s. and PROSTATE the character of brother
senators. This done the Sabbath day,
and by set OF politicians, TO advance their
own political and ambitious purposes, IN the name
OF ouT holy religion.
But this is not ALL 1t was understood from
the newspapers that resolutions were pending
before the legislature Of Ohio, proposing 10 ex-
press their opinions upon this subject 1t was
necessary for these coniederates to get up some
exposition Of the question by which they might
facilitate The passage of the resolution through
that legislature. Hence, you find that the
same morning that this document appears over
the names Of these confederates in the abolition
organ of this city, the same documents appears
in the New York papers-certainly in the Tri-
bune, Times, and Evening Post-in which it
stated by authority that it Ia "sighed by the
senators aud majority of the representatives
from the State of Ohio IA statement which
have every reason TO believe was utterly false,
aad known.io BE- so at the time that these con-
fedeyates appended tito the address. 1t was
necessary, In order 40 carry out this work of
deception, and to hasten the actian Of The Ohio
legislature under a Misrepresentation, to 8 ate
that 1t was signed no. only by the abolition con,
fede rates, but by the whole whig representation,
and a portion OF the democratic representation,
in the other House from The State Of Ohio.
Mr.. CHASE MIR President
Mr.. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, do not
yield the fl ,or. A senator who has violated all
,he rules of courtesy and propriety, who show
ed a consciousness of the character OF tie act
he vas dong by conceaIing from me all knowl-
edge OF the tact, who came 10 me with smiling
face AID the appearance of friendship, even after
that document had been uttered, who could get
up in the Senate and appeal to my courtesy in
order 10 get time to give the document wider
cifcul atom before its infany could b. exposed
such senator has no right to mF courtesy upon
this floor.
Mr.. CHASE Mr. President, the senator
isstates the facts
Mr.. DOUGLAS. Mr.. President, decline
to yield the floor.
Mr. CHASE. And shall make my denial
pertinent when the time comes.
The PRESIDENT Order.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. Sir, if the senator does
lnterpnse IN violation OF the rules of the Senate
denial of the fact, it may be that shall be
able to nail tina, denial, as shall The Statements
here which are over his owa signature, as a
base fa!ehood, and prove it by the solemn legis.
lation of this country
Mr. CHASE call the senator TO order.
The pRESlDENr. The senator from Illi-
noIs is certainIy oat of order.
Mr. DOUGLAS. Then, will only say that
! shall confine myself to this document, and
prove its stat~n nts to be false by the legisIa-
ton of the country. Certainly that is "a or
der,
Mr.. CHASE. You cannot do it,
Mr.. DOUGLAS The argument Of this
manifesto is predicated upon the assumption that
the policy OF the fathers of the republic was to
prohibit slavery in all the territory ceded by the
old States to the Union, and made u s. terrific.
ry, for purpose OF being organized into new
States. take issue upon that statement =
Such was not the practice in the early history
OF the government. II is true that ip the terri
tory northwest Of the Ohio river, slavery was
proh hbted by the ordinance of 1897, but it is
also true that in the territory south Of the Ohio
..;;str-to wit. the territory of Tennessee sla-
v-ly was permitted and protected and it is also
true that in the organization Of the Territory "
Mississippi, in l79S, the provisions Of the ordi-
nance OF 1877 we're applied to il, with the ex-
ception of the 9th article, which prohibited sla-
very. Then, sir, you fnd upon the statue
DO nks, under Washington andshe early Presi-
dents, provisions OF law showing that in the
southwestern territories the right to hold slaves
clearly implied or recognised, while in the
northwest territories it was prohibited. The
only conclusion that can be fairly and honestly
drawn from that legislation is, that 1t was the
policy Of the fathers of the republic to prescribe
line of demarcation between free territories
and slayeholding territories by natural or
geographical line, being sure to make that line
correspond, as near as might be, to the laws Of
climate, Of production. and probably of Gil those
other causes that would control the institution
and make il either desirable o. undesirable 10
the people inhabitiny the respective territories
Sir, wish you to bear in mind, too, that this
geographical line established by the founders of
the republic, between free territories and slave
territories, extended as far westward as our ter
ritory then reached the object being to avoid
all agitation upon the slavery question by set
Ting that question forever, SO far our territory
extended, which was then 10 the Mississippi
river
When, in 1893, we acquired from France the
territory known as Louisiana, it became neces
sary to legisate for the protection of the inhab-
ilan residing therein. 1t will be seen, by look
ing into the bill establishing the territorial gov.
ernment in 1905 for the Territory Of New Or
leans, embracing the same country now known
as the State of Louisiana, that the ordinance of
1887 was expressly extended TO that Territory,
excepting the sixth section, which prohibited
slavery. Then that act implied that the Terri
tory of New Orleans was to be sIavekolding
Territory by making that exception in the law.
called the Territory Of Louis ana, subsequently
known us the Territory of Miss, uri, north Of
the 33d parallel, they used different language
They did not extend the ordinance Of 1857 to il
at all. They first provided that il should be
governed by laws made by the governor and
the judges end when, in 1919, Congress gave
to that Territory, under the name of the Ferri-
tory of Missouri, territorial government, the
people were allowed to do as they pleased upon
the subject of slavery, subject only to the lin
itaiions of the constitution Of the U. S Now,
what is the Inference from that legislation p
That slavery was by implication recognised
south of the 3d parallel, and north Of i, that the
people were l,fi to exercise their own judgment,
and d., as they pleased upon the subJect, with.
out any implication for or against the existence
of the lnstit uton
THIS continued to be the condition of the
country IN the Missouri Territory up to 1920,
when the celebrated act, which now called
the Missouri Compromise act, passed.
SLAYER did not exist in, nor it excluded
from, the country now known Nebraska
There no code of laws upon the subject Of
slavery either way: FIRST, for he reason that
slavery had never been introduced into Lousi-
ana and established by positive enactment. Ii
bad grown Up there by sort Of common la W !,
aud been supported and protected. When a
common law grows up, when an institution be-
comes established under usage, it carries it SO
far as that usage actually goes and no further.
If it had been established by direct enactment
it might have carried it 8, far as the political
jurisd rction extended. But be that as it may,
by the act of 1872, creating the Territory o,
NJ ssouri, that Territory was allowed To legrs-
late upon the subject OF slavery a. it saw proper
subject only to the limitations which have
stated and the C untry not inhabited or brown
open To s-tternent was set apart as Indian
country, and rendered subject TO Indian laws
Hence The local legislation Of the State Of Ms
sour, did not reach inte that Indian country,
but was excluded ffon it lay the Indian code
and Indian laws The municipal! regulations Of
Missouri could not go ttere until the Indian IT,
tie had been ex'inguished and the country
tn own open t. settlement. Such being the
case, the only legislation in existence III Ne
bra -ka Territory al the time that the missouri
act pass d. namely, the 6tn OF March. 1920
was pr vision, injefftct that the people should
be allowed TO do as they pleased upon the sub
iect of slavery
The Territory of Missouri having been lett
in that legal condition, positive oppositon was