The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-01

7. ii was not thus drawn in question: that zoe ought Al
nave been made of H. Now, Mr.. Presldeat il is il
known that Mr. Webster supported The eompromise md
of 1880 and the principle involved ~ them Of ea
he people do they pleased upon this subject tbl
therefore, that have shown that these gentlemen arr
authorized quote the name either OF MT Webster or
Clay in support OF the position which they take that
ball violates the faith of eompac,s. SIR II was because
Webster went for giving the people IN the Territories
right 10 do they pleased upon the subject Of slavery
because he In favor OF carrying out the eonsuIox
regard 20 fugitive slaves, that he not allowed 10
ia Faneuil Hall.
MIR EVERETT. That was not nay fault II
MIR. DOUGLAS. know il mott but saw il
because he took that position II was because he did ma
for prohibtory policy II was because he advocated
same principles which now advocate; because he went
the same provisions in the Utah bill which now sns u
In this bill that Boston aboonists turned their back
him, just as they burnt me IN efigy Sir, if identity
principle If identity of support friends il idepti
enemies, fix Mr.. Webster's position, his authority q
tanly with US, and not with the abohtionsts bsyy
right, therefore, to have the sympathes Of his Bos
friends with me, as sympathlzed with him when the "a
principle involved
MIR President, am sorry that have taken up so nj
time but must notice one or two points So m,y
has been said about the Missouri-C compromise aet \
about faithful compliance with il by The Norh d,
must follow that matter little further. The senator N
Ohio [Mr. WADE has referred, tonight, TO the fact Ii.
went for carrying out the Missouri Compfomse in !
Texas resolutions of lS45, and in ls46, several O.
until 1850 He need not have taken the pains to prov,
fact for he got all his information the subject
my opening speech upon this BILL told you then Ia
was willing, as northern man, IN lS45 when the Ts
question arose, TO carry the Missouri Compromlte
through that State, and in lS48 offered il as an au
ment 10 the Oregoa bill Although did not like the
cple Involved IN that act yet was willing, for the sa
harmony, to extend TO the Pacific and abide by ns
faith in order to avoid the slavery agitation The Miss
Compromise defeated then by the same class Of
clans who combined il opposition to the Ne6s
bill Ii was because we were unable to carry that
PROMISE that necessity existed for making oo
1850 and then established this great principle Of
government, which lies at the foundation Of all ms
tons. What does his charge amount to He eharge
matter of offence tina, struggled, in l845 and in
to observe good faith and he and his associates dea
my purpose, ana deprived of the ability to carry
what he says the plighed faith of the nation.
Mr.. WADE did not charge the senator with anyu
except with making very excellent argument on my su
the question, and wished he would make 1t again .on
| Mr.. DOUGLAS. What was the argument who
made A southern senator had complained that the
souri, Compromise was matter of injustice TO the Soul
told him he ought not to complain of that when his so
friends here proposing to accept II and we
carry it out, he had no right to make such compliant
was anxious carry il out. ltwould not have done
northern who was opposed to the measure and un
ling to abide it, to take that position. 1t would net have
come the senator from Ohio, who then denounced The
measure which he now calls sacred compact to take
position But, who had always been in favor Of
yng out it legitimate and proper that should
| that argument in reply.
Sir as have said the South were willing to agree 10
Missouri Compromise in l64S When it was proposed
me the Oregon BILL amendment, to extend that
the Pacific, the South agreed 10 it, The Senate ado
that proposition and the House voted it down. In IN
after the omnibus bill had broken down, and proceed
pass the compromise separately, propos
| when the Utah bill under discussion, to make s1
variation of the boundary of that Territory so as INC
the Mormon settlements and not with reference to
L II WIS
line Of sc deg. 80 min That would have accomplished
local objects Of the amendment very we'll But when
posed IT, what did these free-soiers say What did
1 senator from New Hampshire, Mr.. Hale who was \
their leader in this body say Here are his words;
| "Mr HALE. | wish TO say word as reason VII
shall vote against the amendment shall vote agains
deg. 80 min because think there implication IN
ILaughter will for 81 deg. SO deg. either
as it Is convenient but is idle TO shut eyes to the
that here is attempt in this bill will not say Isl
intention of the moverto pledge this Senate and Congr
to the imaginary line OF 36 deg and 80 min because
some historical recolectlons connected with IN reg
to this controversy about slavery. will content my
sasa.,s ylning may bind the action Of our leg
ton here TO make the parallel of 36 deg 80 min the bou
airy line between slave and free territory And wher II
that, explain the reason why 90 against the ams
Il ment.n
i These remarks Of Mr.. Hale were not made on prop
ton to extend the Acknowledgements line to the Pad
but on proposition to fix SO deg. 80 min. the south
because there mi ht be, he said implication grow
out of historical recollecons favor of imaginary
between slavery and freedom. Does that look if his
eot was 20 get an mpcauon in favor Of preserving sac
this line IN regard 10 which gentlemen say there VI
solemn compact' That proposition may illustrate wa
wish to gay IN this connexon upon point which has
made by the opponents Of this bill TO the effect Of
amendment inserted on the motion Of the senator from
ginia, Mr.. MAsoH,) into the Texas boundary bill.
opponents OF this measure rely upon that amendment
show that the Texas compact preserved by the act
| 1850, have already shown, in my former speech
the object Of amendment was to guarantee TO the STAT
Texas with her circumscribed boundaries the
Der of States which she would have had under her Ia
| boundaries, and with the right to in with
without slavery, as theypleased. We have been told,
and over again, that there such thing inmaed IN
bate as that the country off from Texas TO be
eyed from the stipulations Of that compromise. This
been asserted boldly and Internationally, if there e
be no doubt about II. The senator from Georgia
TooMBs in his speech showed that in his address 10
constituents Of that State, he had proclaimed TO the
that the object was to establish principle which would
low the people to decide the question Of slavery for tn
selves north as well as south Of 36 deg 30 min. The
OF 36 deg. 30 min. voted down the boundary
Utah, that there should be even an impicato
favor OF mag mary line TO divide freedom from sav
Subsequently, when the Texas boundary bill was VI
consideration on the next day after the amendment Of
snator from Virginia had been adopted, the record say
"Mr. SEBASTIAN moved to add to the second article
following
VI tnp Nohuuon ,nnt INC territofy hercDy ctocu
be, at the proper tme formed into State and ADM
INTO The Union, with constitution with without the
hbiuon of slavery therein the people of the said i,
tory may a. the time determine"
Then the senator from Arkansas did propose that the
rltory cut of should be relieved from that restriction 10
press terms and allowed to in according the p
ciples of this bill. What donei The debate connu
"Mr Foorvl Will my friend allow TO appeal tol
to move thu. amendment when the territorial bill for
Mexico shall be up for consideration Il will certainly
part Of that bill and shall then for it with pleas